• SolarNialamide@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s also a third group of people who find the absence of free will neither comforting nor terrifying, but just don’t give a fuck. The absence of free will is just a simple fact, and it doesn’t have any impact on my life whatsoever. I’m still doing what I was always gonna do and my brain will still produce the feeling that I’m in control of myself and my life, just like everyone else. I don’t understand what there is to even have feelings about on the matter.

    • AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would argue the vast majority of people are like this, this is the neutral position. You act in the world as if the implications of all of this are meaningless.

      Even if you believe there is no free will, it doesn’t change how you behave in any significant way, because your are the sum total of your parts.

      The Dan Dennett’s and Sam Harris’ of the world are having an argument that ultimately means nothing to us because we’ll act the same way regardless of this information.

      • SolarNialamide@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah. To me it’s not even a fun philosophical exercise like thinking about what came before the big bang or if there is anything ‘outside’ of the universe. I feel like it’s a debate from before modern physics. Like, 500 years ago there was a lively debate on the matter of free will in a religious context. And I guess the only way to still believe in free will and its contradiction with the laws of nature is when you believe in God. But for everyone else it’s just so damn obvious free will can’t exist and it’s just human ego wanting to pretend we have control. ‘Free will doesn’t exist’ is as obvious and unimpactful of a fact to me as 2+2=4.

        • stingpie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I disagree with that view, mostly because I don’t think that free will means completely random. Imagine the goldbach conjecture, there are two simple rules, divide by two if even, multiply by three and add 1 if odd. If you take any number, it is impossible to determine when that number will enter a loop, unless you go through the whole process. The brain is like that, but a trillion times more complicated. Is the brain deterministic? Yes. But does that mean you can determine what choice someone will make? No.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It does have implications.

      Most of humanity believes in some form of next life where they will have to face the implications of what they did in this life. If you are a determinist you either have to accept really depressing Calvinism or conclude that the system makes no sense. Can you really imagine the world being the way it is if billions of people admitted that there was no afterlife or they accepted that literally no actions would impact it? I am willing to bet at least some things would change.

      What would a criminal justice system look like where we accepted that A —> B? Precrime? Livestream scared straight programs? Cutting off all rehabilitation for people serving terminal sentences? I am not sure exactly how it would play out.

      What about day-to-day social norms breaking? If someone broke the rules would we make a point to call it out and punish them publicly since we believe that the main purpose is to prevent others from copying them?