[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

File: 419 KB, 794x848, 1598678912196.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 04:25:37 2020 No.16350640 [Reply] [Original]

What books prove Free Will is real? Recommend me some pro-Free Will books.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 04:34:31 2020 No.16350661 >>16350640 The first quote sounds good right up until the innocent person is you.

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 04:36:06 2020 No.16350669
File: 27 KB, 486x486, galen strawson.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>1. You do what you do because of the way you are.
So
>2. To be truly morally responsible for what you do you must be truly responsible for the way are - at least in certain crucial mental respects.
But
>3. You cannot be truly responsible for the way you are, so you cannot be truly responsible for what you do.
Why can't you be truly responsible for the way you are? Because
>4. To be truly responsible for the way you are, you must have intentionally brought it about that you are the way you are, and this is impossible
Why is it impossible? Well, suppose it is not. Suppose that
>5. You have somehow intentionally brought it about that you are the way you now are, and that you have brought this about in such a way that you can now be said to be truly responsible for being the way you are now.
For this to be true
>6. You must already have had a certain nature N in the light of which you intentionally brought it about that you are as you now are
But then
>7. For it to be true you and you alone are truly responsible for how you now are, you must be truly responsible for having had the nature N in the light of which you intentionally brought it about that you are the way you now are.
So
>8. You must have intentionally brought it about that you had that nature N, in which case you must have existed already with a prior nature in the light of which you intentionally brought it about that you had the nature N in the light of which you intentionally brought it about that you are the way you now are ...
Here one is setting off on the regress. Nothing can be causa sui in the required way. Even if such causal 'aseity' is allowed to belong unintelligibly to God, it cannot be plausibly be supposed to be possessed by ordinary finite human beings

Go on, try to refute him. You can't.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 04:39:52 2020 No.16350680 File: 40 KB, 644x800, 1598376844420.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >The first quote sounds good right up until the innocent person is you.

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 04:48:53 2020 No.16350711

>>16350669
>Here one is setting off on the regress. Nothing can be causa sui in the required way. Even if such causal 'aseity' is allowed to belong unintelligibly to God, it cannot be plausibly be supposed to be possessed by ordinary finite human beings
Some events are unpredictable from prior events. They are causa sui, starting new causal chains. See Quantum Mechanics.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 04:50:03 2020 No.16350717 >>16350640 Anything by Robert Kane.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 04:50:19 2020 No.16350718 >>16350711 Perhaps, but humans are not.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 04:53:14 2020 No.16350730 >>16350711 You can have unpredictability without indeterminism (or new causal chains). See Quantum Mechanics.

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 04:53:16 2020 No.16350731

>>16350640
chaos theory says free will is not a thing, which leads us to determinism.
if you can disprove chaos theory as a whole, then free will is real.
but so far, when you run a system with the exact starting point, the road and the ending will always be same, at least from the studies we've done. there might be random variables in our universe, even though, to this day, we havent proven absolute randomness to be a thing.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:00:13 2020 No.16350764 >>16350718 >but humans are not. We are made of the microscopic world though, there's a clear paradox here. How to solve this?

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:04:32 2020 No.16350784 >>16350764 The point is that even if random quantum fluctuations do affect human mental states, it still does not give us freedom or autonomy. We are just nondeterministically unfree. Galen Strawson's argument does not depend on determinism.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:05:51 2020 No.16350788 >>16350730 Yeah I know there's multiple interpretations of QM anon.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:26:47 2020 No.16350852 >>16350680

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:28:50 2020 No.16350863 Pol Pot never said that.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:33:50 2020 No.16350880 >>16350863 I remember this idea being excuted far before pol pot

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:37:15 2020 No.16350892 freedom evolves by daniel dennett > in b4 someone calls dennett midwit because he was in that shitty four horsemen of atheism meme a million years ago with sam harris, dennett is actually good

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:37:17 2020 No.16350894
File: 1.59 MB, 940x1640, Kant_foto.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

The first part (the first 4 theorems) of Chapter 1 of Kant's Critique of Practical Reason conclusively proves that we have free will even if the physical world is fully deterministic.
The whole passage isn't that long, just around 20 pages.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:39:10 2020 No.16350900 >>16350880 So? Its not something he would have subscribed to.

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:40:24 2020 No.16350907

>>16350892
I call him a midwit because to this day he still has not understood what the hard problem of consciousness consists of, ending up making truly retarded claims, like the one for which the hard problem mimics the vitalist debate.
And that's just because I want to be fair: in actuality I'm sure he understood it, and just pretends he hasn't because it refutes a good chunk of his ontology and philosophy of mind.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:45:06 2020 No.16350931 >>16350894 i'm going to exercise my free will by never reading it

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:45:22 2020 No.16350935 File: 62 KB, 1142x797, pol curve.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>16350900 >Its not something he would have subscribed to.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:46:03 2020 No.16350936 >>16350892 He is a midwit.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:46:34 2020 No.16350939 >>16350892 His views on consciousness are just bad, Chalmers is better.

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:51:21 2020 No.16350956

>>16350935
Foreign intervention, alienated against two warring powers has that affect. In any case, the Khmer Rougue was a rag tag band of peasants without any zealous central governing philosophy other than a push for agrreianism and the atrocities committed weren't from Pol Pot. There wasn't much of an "enemy of the people" campaign either which is why OP's quote is blatantly fake. Watch the interview of him on YouTube. The idea that Pol Pot was a bloodthirsty psychopath is a meme. Mao did far worse. If you want to say that it is a consequence of his policies, revolution, etc, that is a better argument but to say he deliberately set out with an organized governing philosophy and brutally oppress anyone who disagrees is fiction not built on reality.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:54:26 2020 No.16350964 pol pot was a slightly overzealous buddhist who wanted to make the nation the sangha

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 05:55:41 2020 No.16350972 >>16350931 :(

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:00:54 2020 No.16350989 >>16350956 >Even those who were stereotypically thought of as having intellectual qualities, such as wearing glasses or speaking multiple languages, were executed for fear that they would rebel against the Khmer Rouge.[86] Glasses bad. Monke good.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:01:47 2020 No.16350994 >>16350640 >prove Free Will is real? You can't as far as I know. All you have are arguments that hypothetically allows for free will, not an actual proof.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:03:10 2020 No.16350997 >>16350989 Another meme having nothing to do with Pol Pot. Pol Pot wore glasses.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:04:39 2020 No.16351003 File: 36 KB, 307x409, dictators_polpot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>16350989

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:06:06 2020 No.16351006 >>16350997 >>16351003 A psychopath never cares about others, only about himself. Confirmed he was a psychopath.

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:07:38 2020 No.16351011

>>16350989
>Even those who were stereotypically thought of as having intellectual qualities, such as wearing glasses or speaking multiple languages
Ah yes, a man who wore glasses and spoke French fluently would clearly want to do this. Imagine being retarded enough to believe any of this, much less that any of it came from Pol Pot himself.
>>16351006
He wasn't a psychopath.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:09:32 2020 No.16351021 >>16351011 >Ah yes, a man who wore glasses and spoke French fluently would clearly want to do this. Yes he did. That's exactly what he did and happened >He wasn't a psychopath. Yes he was.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:10:27 2020 No.16351027 >>16351021 Prove it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:11:57 2020 No.16351029 >>16351027 Prove what? The cambodian genocide? What the Khmer Rouge did? Lmao, you want me to prove the holocaust along the way too? Retard.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:13:04 2020 No.16351034 Pol Pot wasn't a psychopath. He was something worse: an idealist.

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:13:49 2020 No.16351036

>>16351021
>>16351029
What's more likely
>loose bunch of peasants has some bad apples
>DUDE LE EPIC BAD GUY WANTED TO DO ALL THIS ON PURPOSE, LIKE HE WORE GLASSES and SPOKE FRENCH HIMSELF , ITS JUST LIKE STAR WARS DUDE HE EXECUTED ORDER 55 AND EVERYONE WHO WORE GLASSES WERE EXECUTED.

Prove that the Cambodian Genocide was Pol Pot's design or that he deliberately was the cause of it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:15:42 2020 No.16351039 >>16350640 Hegel science of logic, the second book on essence

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:16:12 2020 No.16351043 >>16351036 Who leaded the Khmer Rouge? Santa? Who leaded nazi germany? Santa too?

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 06:23:37 2020 No.16351065

>>16351043
Nazi Germany had a governing ideology and an a well organized state bureaucracy.

The Khmer Rouge was a bunch of peasants with different interests and no clear ideological leadership. Pol Pot obviously did not set out to commit any genocide or atrocities and there is no evidence showing he had anything against glasses or speaking French.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 07:53:13 2020 No.16351356 >>16350640 Self help books always imply that our fate is in our hands. Considering their popularity people must resonate with the messages they provide. If people didn't agree with free will these books would not exist.

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 07:56:26 2020 No.16351362

>>16351356
>People’s coping mechanisms are so strong that the pessimist has a difficult time getting a fair hearing. Bookshops have entire sections devoted to “self-help” volumes, not to mention “spirituality and religion” and other feel-good literature. There are no “self-helplessness” or “pessimism” sections in bookstores because there is a vanishingly small market for such ideas. I am not seriously advocating self-helplessness. I think that there are some matters about which we are helpless, but even on a realistic pessimistic view, there are things we can do to meliorate (or aggravate) our predicament.
David Benatar

Anonymous Sun Sep 13 07:57:05 2020 No.16351364

>>16350640
Free will presupposes a distinct difference between "consciousness" and biological mechanisms of the brain. Thus it can be said that both proved the existence of a "soul" thus the belief in distinction between man and animal. Both proves the existence of god.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 08:05:53 2020 No.16351385 File: 187 KB, 500x694, 1552194080445.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>16350680 >i'm proud of acting like a nigger

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 09:37:35 2020 No.16351706 >>16351385 >look mom I said the n-word

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 09:42:37 2020 No.16351725 >>16351706 >implying he isn't acting like a nigger

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 10:02:46 2020 No.16351834 >>16350640 Use your common sense, retard.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 13 11:12:53 2020 No.16352155 >>16350640 Chink morality vs Human morality in a nutshell

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]