/lit/ - Literature

>>11808467
um but we do have free will, it's just not used that often

How can you "believe" in anything without free will?

>he doesn't ontologically bracket the world and begin all philosophical inquiry with the pure intuition of Being prior to its subdivision into historically contingent beings
>he doesn't commence with practical-intuitive phenomenological investigation of the pure, contingenciless self, or Dasein, for whom the now-bracketed world of beings as a whole is only an anstoß
>he doesn't question why the only truly primordial experiences open to phenomenological inquiry are the anstoß constituted by historically contingent beings, and the pure self
>he doesn't reflect on the pure self and realise that its nature lies in autonomy and spontaneity
>he doesn't reflect on the anstoß and realise that its nature lies in total determinacy and contingency, mechanistic cause and effect
>he doesn't realise that any account of the anstoß must necessarily be determinate and contingent, and that the intuitive apprehension of the autonomous pure self is inexplicable within determinacy
>he doesn't adopt a pragmatist and hermeneutic epistemology with regard to the mechanistically determinate anstoß/world, for the sake of navigating it and occasionally creating better toasters
>he doesn't commence with further phenomenological investigation into the source and nature of the autonomous and spontaneous pure self, as something inaccessible to discursive understanding and inexpressible as a determinate being, yet ontologically irreducible as the ground of all beings

>>11808494
>live in deterministic world
>think human is somehow special snowflake and is freeeee

You live in the nature, not in a parallel dimension

>>11808467
>cheistian-tier meme
oh yikes my friend you need to read more if you seriously think christianity invented the notion of free will

>>11808508
where do the Greeks talk about free will?

>>11808496
Underrated

>>11808498
>metaphysics

Real fuckin spooky

>>11808508
Read >>11808510
Never heard of fate and destiny

>>11808496
>>11808510
*underage philosophy reader

>>11808505
ya ok du isst lichtung before the horizon not being in thought being in time being through the application of being wahoo

how does nature not encompass every valent dimensionality?

I don't understand this topic.
What's the point of talking about free will? Whether or not we believe our decisions to be free or predetermined, how could it possibly change anything? We perceive our actions to be of our own volition, and we simply cannot perceive this to NOT be the case, even if it isn't

>>11808539
>why think about things? let's just smoke a weed instead

Determinists and free willies are too busy biting each others' dicks off to entertain the possibility that the answer could be somewhere in between and that the will can become more or less free through exercise.

What if i'm predetermined to believe in free will?

universe has a design, therefore temporality has a design

if we don't have free will,

the entire universe was already decided from the big bang, and is already permanently in one direction of motion that is perfectly already written based on the mechanics of physicality, until the end of the universe

and then that would mean your life, you are a prisoner of it, just watching it happen, and can do nothing whatsoever to change the course of it all

if you believe that, fuck you. seriously, fuck you. rethink your shit. you don't even actually understand science whatsoever, and science does not disprove an autonomy of consciousness whatsoever. so fuck you, once again, and fuck off, dear sir.

>>11808539
If it turns out free will doesn't exist, I'm becoming a serial killer.

>>11808649
>implying I can't stop you to do it

>>11808647
>Does not know how to answer properly
>just rant about how life is meaningless

>>11808505
>live in deterministic world
Wew lad. Determinism is illogical, it requires infinite time which is impossible

>>11808669
nah bro saying quite the opposite actually

not sure if you read the post or not. it's an argument for the existence of free will, not against it.

having free will and using it is prettttttttttty fucking meaninful

you're so fucking gay

>>11808670
>requires infinite time
>never heard of moment of singularity

>>11808672
You are the one not reading, it seems. You are a bad coping nihilists that wants free will and so to be some sort of deity out of nature. You are still not able to accept determinism and so you call it meaningless. Literally untermensch.

Does this website filter words or certain phrases? I can't post a response I wrote

>>11808714
>>never heard of moment of singularity
So an uncaused cause? If you believe in uncaused causes then you have no reason not to believe in freewill.

>>11808498
holy shit, kys

>>11808722
>what is quantum mechanics?
Go back to study, you've learned nothing.

>>11808647
>if x is true, then this is the conclusion that would have to be drawn

Yes I agree, anon. Good point, sir.

>fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, for following a point to its conclusion

What?

>>11808714
read Science Set Free by Rupert Sheldrake and if you don't change your mind, you can come back here and call me an asshole

look it up at least

>>11808731
>implying quantum mechanics gets you round the uncaused cause issue
If you think it has then publish your findings and claim your Nobel prize. Just so we know it's you, use the phrase 'my diary desu' in your acceptance speech.

>>11808731
That argument gets thrown about a lot, but what does that have to do with free will? Even if quantum events are unpredictable, I still can't "choose" one outcome over another.

>>11808743
>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake
>Morphic resonance is not accepted by the scientific community as a measurable phenomenon and Sheldrake's proposals relating to it have been characterised as pseudoscience. Critics cite a lack of evidence for morphic resonance and an inconsistency between the idea and data from genetics and embryology. They also express concern that popular attention paid to Sheldrake's books and public appearances undermines the public's understanding of science
no, thanks

>>11808767
I said the moment of singularity is possible due to quantum mechanics.
Read the posts above if you don't understand why we came up to this point. Not here to teach you how to read.

If you aren’t a compatibalist you are a retard worthy only of ridicule.

>>11808950
Nah fampai, hard pessimistic incompatibilism is the only way to go.

>>11808969
Sam Harris tier brainlet I pity you.

>>11809020
A man can do what he wants, but he cannot want what he wants.

>>11808777
>susceptible to wikipedia propoganda

>>11808505
>live in deterministic world
>think he can change people's predetermined beliefs

>>11808647
Wrong, we don't have free will but the predeterminism isn't physical, it's metaphysical. This timeline is one of all possible timelines, but the physical nature can be formed and shaped by a metaphysical force to express itself creatively and experience everything that is possible.

>>11809080
That's one very stupid argument. What if you were "predetermined" to have your beliefs changed by me

>>11808467
>Hope you don't believe in the christian-tier meme of free will anymore.
If I did and I was wrong, I couldn't do anything else, now could I? Determinism is the firm belief that no matter your choices, they have no impact on your life or anything else.

>>11809056
Sure you can. Have a higher goal than what you're aiming to change about yourself. Say, you really like this one group, but you must change an aspect of yourself you don't want to change naturally; you want to want a change there, but it is a choice.

>>11809056
All the anons who've memed themselves into liking traps would beg to differ

Your DNA is a molecular, quantum computer. Do you understand quantum mechanics well enough to determine whether objective knowledge is possible through consciousness borne of this system?

>>11808467
The whole debate is a meme. No intelligent person still believes in magic spirits, most modern philosophers who talk about free will just mean the human ability to make conscious decisions, because telling people they have no control over anything is misleading and sad.

>>11808467
I like Tolstoy interpretation at the end of War and Peace

>>11808498
Good post, actually. Enjoyed reading. Above all thoroughly based sense of humor.

>>11808498
top tier post. berry gud 10/10

oh boy, another one just fresh out of watching harris' videos on youtube.

Materialism and atheism are truly a poison for the soul. I know because I was there, believing things like similar to OPs statement.

Guess I have to post it again.

''Physicalism—whether it ultimately turns out to be philosophically correct or not—is hypothesized to be partly motivated by the neurotic endeavor to project onto the world attributes that help one avoid confronting unacknowledged aspects of one’s own inner life. ''

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2158244016674515

''Benjamin Libet has argued that electrophysiological signs of cortical movement preparation are present before people report having made a conscious decision to move, and that these signs constitute evidence that voluntary movements are initiated unconsciously. This controversial conclusion depends critically on the assumption that the electrophysiological signs recorded by Libet, Gleason, Wright, and Pearl (1983) are associated only with preparation for movement. We tested that assumption by comparing the electrophysiological signs before a decision to move with signs present before a decision not to move. There was no evidence of stronger electrophysiological signs before a decision to move than before a decision not to move, so these signs clearly are not specific to movement preparation. We conclude that Libet’s results do not provide evidence that voluntary movements are initiated unconsciously.''

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810009001135

>Universe is deterministic
>There's no first cause though lol