|
|
Post by cupcakes on Dec 19, 2017 10:58:46 GMT
tpfkar I'm aware of the Compatibilist position.  He posted earlier that I didn't provide evidence from secular and scientific sources, when both that's not true, and he well knows that there is massive evidence, positions, etc. of both Compatiblist and other free will in the secular scientific or philosophical mainstream.
Can neuroscience understand Donkey Kong?Compatibilist free will isn't something that's amenable to 'evidence', because it's just reshaping the definition of free will to fit reality. So there can be neither evidence for or against compatibilism, it's merely a question of semantics. You most certainly haven't presented any neuroscientific evidence of free will in action, merely rebuttals of the Libet experiment. If you can find a peer reviewed experiment that presents evidence of free will (the libertarian kind) in action, then I'll eat my shirt. I don't particularly care about compatibilist nor other categories that people use slightly differently and others try to distort for purpose, nor of course what you try to casually dismiss because you wanna. What normal people think and have thought is both that cause and effect is universal we are part of it and we make choices and act according to our free will. Trying to pigeonhole it into distorted categories or just making up absurdities is the cynical attempt to reshape it for purpose. And feel free to eat your libertarian shirt all you want, all the searching is for evidence against free will, as all actual evidence has supported it and the only real line against it at this time is the highly contested, debated, tumultuous philosophical kind.
And if society wants the fairest possible state of affairs, that would mean no humans and no society. |
|
