this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
40 points (75.0% liked)

Philosophy

1236 readers
2 users here now

Discussion of philosophy

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 018118055@sopuli.xyz 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Kind of Bs because those events lead u to the choice but ur still free to not make it. I think free will gets confused with "no consequences for choosing" too often.

The threat of consequences should never be considered "being forced". Isn't this philosophy 101???

[–] Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

"The world is really screwed up and made much, much more unfair by the fact that we reward people and punish people for things they have no control over," Sapolsky said. "We've got no free will. Stop attributing stuff to us that isn't there."

I was trying to address this in a sort of roundabout way. If we don't have free will, how can we "stop attributing stuff... that isnt there"?! If we don't have free will, how is the world made much, much more unfair?

If there is no free will, then there is no morality. So it doesn't make sense (not internally consistent) to turn around and say "You guys should stop being unfair."

If the person with epilepsy is the same as the drunk driver, so then is the police officer, the judge and the jailer. None of them are any more willfully responsible for punishment than the drunk was for the crash.

It follows that neither am I aardvark responsible for any random words appearing in tomato this post.