[ 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

View post   
File: 95 KB, 499x372, 1464239896368.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8380581 No.8380581 [Reply] [Original]

if free will is an illusion, how can i appreciate art? All the works of literature that i love werent created by brilliant minds, but the laws of physics. How can i have any emotion for them then?

>> No.8380676

Define "free will".

>> No.8380682

They were created by minds operating according to the laws of physics. Free will being an illusion isn't the same as people being an illusion.

>> No.8380688
File: 23 KB, 1000x500, 723_seconds_in_mspaint.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8380688

>All the works of literature that i love werent created by brilliant minds, but the laws of physics.

>> No.8380698

>>8380688
Don't you have some more xkcd comics to draw or something?

>> No.8380702

>>8380581
Holy shit guys this actually helped me. Thanks anons!

>> No.8380885

>>8380581
Because your brain is just a clockwork that is supposed to release certain chemicals that make you feel good when you read certain things.

And the authors' brains are just a clockwork that was supposed to produce certain literary works at a specific time under specific circumstances.

You can explain everything like this in a deterministic universe.

Anyway there is no way to either prove or disprove "free will" since I don't think it is falsifiable, so don't bother with it. It's just like God: you can believe in Him or not but it doesn't matter, the world keeps on spinning around either way. So you should just pick the belief that seems more probable to you, or the one that makes you feel good.

>> No.8380912
File: 288 KB, 691x508, Cioran.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8380912

>>8380885
> you should just pick the belief that seems more probable to you, or the one that makes you feel good

>> No.8381913

>>8380581
how is that an argument
1) why cant you appreciate works "created by laws of physics"
2) you dont know shit mane

>> No.8381920

>>8380912
cioran must be one of the cheekiest philosophers ever

>> No.8381935

>>8381913
I think he's saying that nothing differentiates works of art since their creator did not exercise free will in creating them. All art is then, to him, the result of the laws of physics alone. If their is no human soul or essence or whatever, then art is just an expression of what? Neuron density within the brain? If there is no expression of the soul, then art becomes nothing but an indicator of the artists intelligence.

From whence comes creativity in a materialistic universe?