Since you know absolutely that free will does not exist you would expect you to have more than a piss poor set of illogical premises you could explain. If you are going to say stupid things like a lot of people don't beleive in free will, and Libet does not believe that he disproved free will and then expect us to buy you somehow have, then it begs the question why the hell should we?
This is beyond ridiculous. You keep stating that "I alone know the truth". And I am simply telling you that there are many people who do not believe in free will. How many? I don't know. Is it a majority? Fuck no. The number is not even big enough to be called a minority. But, as someone interested in philosophy, you should already know that in this context numbers are meaningless. So, I am not making an appeal to authority and I'm not saying that you should believe what I believe simply because others believe in it too. The only thing I'm saying
is that I am not the only person who thinks free will is an illusion. I always thought this was self-evident but apparently not since you keep repeating that "I alone know the truth".
This is what I mean by religion, all you really have is faith.
Someone needs to buy a dictionary.
Calrid wrote:If determinism is false then free will exists especially libertarian free will assuming it is not totally random. So yes it does depend on determinism being true, unless you are bizarrely defining free will to be something it isn't. So if determinism is false you have just disproven your own case, nice going.
Dude, are you serious?
First, "if determinism is false, then free will exists" is a complete nonsequitur. But, more importantly, there is no fundamental difference between libertarian free will and the compatibilist position. And guess what? Both revolve around a concept that is not free will.
Why don't you actually read upon these things ?
So what you are saying is free will does not exist because things are determined, and that determinism does not have to be true for this to be the case?
No. Free will can't possibly exist regardless of what kind of universe we live in, be it a deterministic universe, a random universe or a deterministic and random universe.
Lol try a fifth time. What it says is that free will is not a coherent argument, that does not equate to free will does or does not exist, it merely means that philosophy is currently going nowhere fast as it pertains to a logical proof of free will, in fact either way. Basically if you can't define free will coherently then you have no chance of making a decision whether it exists or not. That's what the first paragraph says. Unfortunately your bias translated it as an attack on free wills existence instead of an attack on the argument itself.
Free will is not a coherent argument??? Free will is an concept, not an argument. But also, can you even read?
Here's a quote from that paragraph: ...reveals that the very idea of free will (and so of responsibility) is incoherent (Strawson 1986) or at least inconsistent with a world very much like our own...
It says that free will is incoherent with a world like our own.
Did you skipped this part or something??
I mean, this is pretty fucking ridiculous on your part when you can't even interpret a simple paragraph written in YOUR native language.
Basically the concept does not fit in with what we know about the world and instead of realizing that the concept is nonsensical, you say that there must be something wrong with what we know about the world.
Strong bastardization of logic is strong.
Compatibilism is free will not freedom to act, otherwise what would be the point of discussing it at all?
Again, have you even bothered to read about compatibilism ? Compatibilists use the term free will but they are referring to ability to act freely given your wants which are not freely chosen by you according to this position. They simply mean a situation where the agent was not coerced nor restrained.
And since you were so kind as to link a wikipedia page a few posts ago, here is one for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism
Read it carefully because apparently you don't know what compatibilism is.