Nowhere357

It seems that way. Or at least it SEEMS to seem that way.

Free will and determinism are not incompatible. It's a duality, not too unlike the particle/wave duality of light. Two different but equally valid methods of investigation result in apparently conflicting viewpoints.

We really are responsible for our actions.

Warwick

Specifically, the arguement between free will vs determinism is not important to me, hence the vote.

I do see that paradox that if it truly did not matter, then why cast any vote.

John Page

Gloucestershire:

Has seeing the paradox changed your mind - or didn't I need to change it because you voted anyway?

Cheers, John

El_Hober

I seem to have been misunderstood. I'm not saying that people shouldn't be held responsible for their actions, simply that the debate is irrelevant, as we may as well have free will, but the past is determined, as we have no way of changing it. The future may not be, but it seems that it isn't, and that's enough for me.

Carl Treetop

It most definitely can make a difference. A belief in determinism can free one from the draining emotion of shame and useless blaming of others and self. If also can reduce inappropriate guilt. This effects how we deal with others on a day to day basis, both internally and interactively. The emotion of anger is greatly reduced. One becomes more compassionate. Ironically, deterministic belief (in itself pre-determined) affects some decisions and actions - for the better.

Determinism is in accord with the cause-and-effect nature of Nature. Cause-and-effect seems to be the rule in physics, chemistry and even biology. (The jury is still out on quantum mechanics.) We see C and E in other living creatures. Why would humanity be exempted? Belief in Determinism in much more in alignment with nature than is Free Will. Consequently, life is rendered less stressful and more realistic. ("The truth shall set you free.")

Carl

Bill B

Even though it's impossible to distinquish determinism and free will, I think it does make a difference in our lives to at least acknowledge that every decision we make is the result of the hundreds of trillions of prior events in our lives leading up to that decison and the net effect of those events on neuronal activity. Purpose is provided by acting as if we had free will, but accepting that it is merely an illusion is critical also.

Imagine an impoversihed kid in the ghetto. Let's say his parents are drug addicted, abusive, and engaged in violent criminal activity and he has experienced this for years. He is given a gun and encouraged to use it by his parents for personal gain. Isn't it more reasonable to assume that if he confronts you in some dark alley, that the decisions he makes will reflect his past history rather than represent a freewill choice between all available alternatives? He will do what his brain "instructs" him to do at that moment.
Let's lock him up for committing the crime since organized society has a right to protect its members, but let's not pretend that the kid had a choice. His actions were pre-determined.

And in our own cases of decison making, accepting determinism means we don't have to agonize and suffer with illogical theistic worldview guilt feelings about our decisions. I know that society forces us to live under this illusion of freewill, but aren't we better off recognizing that we are only pretending we had a choice. It's a subtle distinction, but I think it provides insight and comfort.

Nostalgic Pushhead

I really don't understand this.
But I don't see any "benefit" in saying we don't have free will.
Seems like a cheap way to avert blame.

But really, I don't think it matters. Its not provable either way. It SEEMS I have free choice. I can go to the fridge and choose between a pepperoni or cheese microwave pizza. I can choose to do homework or not. I seem to have choice, so be it.

James Hamlin

In discussions of free will versus determinism, it always appears that those engaged acknowledge some kind of free will, or submit to the illusion of it, to allow themselves a more distant perspective to analyze the situation. Perhaps this is due to the limits of language, or the muddled thoughts that can arise when one tries to analyze one's own mind. Regardless of the reason why, it seems that when one expresses determinism one seems to say that "we are just along for the ride," the "we" being our conscious selves. The reality is that our conscious selves, our egos, are, in fact, just as much the "ride" itself as they are the observer. Yet it is, as far as I can tell from my limited perspective and experience, impossible to throw off the idea that one has some kind of independent control. I suppose that this is obvious; our conscious minds are, after all, decision-making structures, so, to them, they would appear to have such freedom.

I guess my point is that it is difficult to truly comprehend the fact that our selves, our conscious selves, actually are the mechanistic and determined structures we are discussing.

Whatever.

John Page

Forgive him, for he knows not what he does!

Nostalgic Pushhead

Well I could just not do it and say well, "Its not my fault, I was fated to do it because I'm tired and in a crappy mood."

I guess I just don't understand the concept. So I'll just say "I don't care" and go back to bed.