3 ms·
This is the position that is literally called compatibilist. But when you probe people, while a lot of people will argue in ways that a philosopher might call
by vidarh 1y ago
This is the position that is literally called compatibilist.
But when you probe people, while a lot of people will argue in ways that a philosopher might call compatibilist, my experience is that people will also strongly resist the notion that the only options are randomness and determinism. A lot of people have what boils down to a religious belief in a third category that is not merely a combination of those two, but infuses some mysterious third options where they "choose" that they can't explain.
Most of the time, people who believe there is no free will (and can't be), like me, take positions similar to what you described, that - again - a proponent of free will might describe as compatibilist, but sometimes we oppose the term for the reason above: A lot of people genuinely believe in a "third option" for choices are made.
And so there are really two separate debates on free will: Does the "third option" exist or not, and does "compatibilist free will" exist or not. I don't think I've ever met anyone who seriously disagrees that "free will" the way compatibilists define it exists, so when compatibilists get into arguments over this, it's almost always a misunderstanding...
But I have met plenty of people who disagree with the notion that things are deterministic "from the outside".
- adastra22 1y agoIt is stronger than compatibilism. Compatibilism argues that free will and determinism are orthogonal. The argument I summarized is that free will is and must necessarily imply determinism..
- vidarh 1y agoI think that is a distinction without difference in as much as it's an excuse not to deal with it. But compatibilist "free will" must imply determinism unless some "magic" third alternative exists, because there isn't another option, and there is no evidence to suggest such a third alternative exists, so in practice every compatibilist I've had this discussion with have fallen back on arguing free will is compatible with determinism.
- GoblinSlayer 1y agoDefinition doesn't tell all implications. In practice compatibilists do deeper analysis that reveals that determinism is required for free will.
- GoblinSlayer 1y agoOpposing the term gives a wrong result too, as people jump to hard determinism.
- vidarh 1y agoHowever "hard" your determinism, there is no support for the notion of agency, and that is all that matters. Without agency, free will is nothing but an illusion, with same moral consequences.
- GoblinSlayer 1y agoAnd agency as inner motivation exists and is determined by your character, otherwise it would be not yours.
- adastra22 1y agoThis isn’t true. The position I argued for above is that agency derives from determinism because it is necessarily causal: you have agency because you make decisions in line with your goals. If you didn’t make decisions that were deterministically selected from your goals, you’d actually lack agency!
- vinceguidry 1y agoI'm a regular practitioner of magic, have written essays about it on Quora, and I can identify this mysterious third option as "the universe responding to your needs." You can use any number of religious terms to refer it to, like serendipity and the like, but none of them can capture the full texture of precisely how free will operates. Approaching this subject from a rational perspective divorces you from subject and makes it impossible to perceive. You have to immerse yourself in it and one way to do that is magical practice. Having direct experience of the universe responding to your actions and mindset eventually makes it absurdly clear that the universe bears intelligence and it's in this intelligence that free will operates. I'd never thought before now to connect magic this directly to free will. Thanks for the opportunity to think this through! If you're interested in a deeper discussion, happy to jump on a call.
- chipsrafferty 1y agolmao, magic? seriously?
- vinceguidry 1y agoYou betcha.