poor old hitler

Originally posted by dottewell
But all of that is compatible with determinism, when "choice" and "belief" are properly understood.

But despite this you still make the distinction between co-ercion by an outside agent and co-ercion by the forces of determinism. If determinism is true then we all being co-erced either directly or indirectly ALL the time in ALL choices. Our actions and choices are always forced by the physical forces that cause them. Determinism means forced causation whther by gun or gene.

Originally posted by knightmeister
But despite this you still make the distinction between co-ercion by an outside agent and co-ercion by the forces of determinism. If determinism is true then we all being co-erced either directly or indirectly ALL the time in ALL choices. Our actions and choices are always forced by the physical forces that cause them. Determinism means forced causation whther by gun or gene.

No; it simply doesn't make sense to talk of "coercion" by the cosmos. It doesn't act to any end. It isn't restricting our freedom since the freedom we have is WITHIN a (deterministic) universe. So the cosmos isn't somehow acting on us to limit our range of choices to a smaller number within a larger set of potential choices. We NEVER HAD that larger set of potential choices - at least not in the way you mean.

By contrast if a man holds a gun to my head he is limiting my range of choices from a larger potential set - when choice is understood in the way the compatibilist means.

The cosmos goes on deterministically, and we exist as part of it; within that, there is such a thing as free human choice. And this free human choice does not require that identical circumstances could produce two different outcomes. It does not require that I could have acted differently to how I actually did act. That's not what free choice, for a human, actually is.

Your libertarian freedom doesn't exist, maybe doesn't even make sense. But that doesn't matter, since we don't need it.

Originally posted by dottewell
No; it simply doesn't make sense to talk of "coercion" by the cosmos. It doesn't act to any end. It isn't restricting our freedom since the freedom we have is WITHIN a (deterministic) universe. So the cosmos isn't somehow acting on us to limit our range of choices to a smaller number within a larger set of potential choices. We NEVER HAD that larger set of ...[text shortened]... xist, maybe doesn't even make sense. But that doesn't matter, since we don't need it.

So the cosmos isn't somehow acting on us to limit our range of choices to a smaller number within a larger set of potential choices. We NEVER HAD that larger set of potential choices - at least not in the way you mean. DOTTY

But in a deterministic universe the number and range of potential choices we have that are real and possible is always....erhem....one. If there is more than one potential and real possible choice then determinism falls. One can never ever say "I chose A but potentially I could have chosen B." To me for a choice to be a potential choice it has to be a real possibility otherwise it's...well...silly. I might as well say "I could potentially fly like an eagle if I was an eagle" but if it's not really possible it's meaningless to say that it's a potential "choice" because it's a choice that is not available to you. Just like all the other choices that are not available to you except for the one choice that the cosmos (with a little help from physical laws) dictates that you will make.

Originally posted by dottewell
No; it simply doesn't make sense to talk of "coercion" by the cosmos. It doesn't act to any end. It isn't restricting our freedom since the freedom we have is WITHIN a (deterministic) universe. So the cosmos isn't somehow acting on us to limit our range of choices to a smaller number within a larger set of potential choices. We NEVER HAD that larger set of ...[text shortened]... xist, maybe doesn't even make sense. But that doesn't matter, since we don't need it.

So the cosmos isn't somehow acting on us to limit our range of choices to a smaller number within a larger set of potential choices. We NEVER HAD that larger set of potential choices - at least not in the way you mean. DOTTY

But in a deterministic universe the number and range of potential choices we have that are real and possible is always....erhem....one. If there is more than one potential and real possible choice then determinism falls. One can never ever say "I chose A but potentially I could have chosen B." To me for a choice to be a potential choice it has to be a real possibility otherwise it's...well...silly. I might as well say "I could potentially fly like an eagle if I was an eagle" but if it's not really possible it's meaningless to say that it's a potential "choice" because it's a choice that is not available to you. Just like all the other choices that are not available to you except for the one choice that the cosmos (with a little help from physical laws) dictates that you will make.

Originally posted by knightmeister
But in a deterministic universe the number and range of potential choices we have that are real and possible is always....erhem....one. If there is more than one potential and real possible choice then determinism falls.

You continue to misunderstand what choice is. I can choose to eat an apple, or a pear. I select one or the other, for whatever reason. The fact that in those identical circumstances I would always have chosen the same doesn't mean there wasn't a real act of free choosing. I wasn't compelled; I went through an act or reasoning; I chose.

Contrast this with the case where a man stands with a gun to my head and says: "Pick the apple or I'll blow your brains out."

Originally posted by knightmeister
"I could potentially fly like an eagle if I was an eagle"

It's nothing like that; I can, for example, say that I would have acted differently had I had different information, or beliefs, or whatever, or had the circumstances been different, and such statements can be true - even if there were only one way events were actually going to unfold.

Originally posted by dottewell
You continue to misunderstand what choice is. I can choose to eat an apple, or a pear. I select one or the other, for whatever reason. The fact that in those identical circumstances I would always have chosen the same doesn't mean there wasn't a real act of free choosing. I wasn't compelled; I went through an act or reasoning; I chose.

Contrast this wit ...[text shortened]... man stands with a gun to my head and says: "Pick the apple or I'll blow your brains out."

He still has a choice - only the conditions of influence are more extreme. He still reasons that one one hand I can pick and apple, on the other I can be shot in the head. I think I'll go with the apple as the preferred choice. Just because the outcome appears more likely, doesn't mean the choice is gone.

Originally posted by Coletti
He still has a choice - only the conditions of influence are more extreme. He still reasons that one one hand I can pick and apple, on the other I can be shot in the head. I think I'll go with the apple as the preferred choice. Just because the outcome appears more likely, doesn't mean the choice is gone.

Well, yes - but I wouldn't call choosing to eat the apple an act of free choice, any more than I freely hand over my wallet to a mugger with a knife at my throat.

Originally posted by knightmeister
... But in a deterministic universe the number and range of potential choices we have that are real and possible is always....erhem....one. If there is more than one potential and real possible choice then determinism falls. One can never ever say "I chose A but potentially I could have chosen B." To me for a choice to be a potential choice it has to ...[text shortened]... that the cosmos (with a little help from physical laws) dictates that you will make.

Not true.

Even if your choice is determined, this does not reduce the possible outcomes to one because possibility describes what the available outcomes are as far as you know them and as far as you believe they are actionable.

The only thing beyond choice are those things you believe are unavailable. Any choice that you believe can be acted on is a possibility. So there is always more than one possible outcome when a choice is presented regardless.

If you are presented an apple and a pear, there are two possible outcomes because taking either the apple or the pear are actions you can make. Even if the decision made is a function of God's will, or the extant circumstances, this does not change that fact.

Choice is removed from you when you are physically forced to act against your will, or if a possible outcome is removed (I take away the pear). And even then, the choice is available to not to take action. If I force you to eat the apple, choice is removed only to the possible actions of resistance or compliance. If I knock you out first, all choice is gone.

Originally posted by twhitehead
And now I would ask you to define "personal choice" and show how it is not a physical or divine force. (Otherwise 2. is self contradictory).

Personal choice is possible because of the person. When God creates a soul, He is creating a 'mini God,' for lack of a better way of describing the phenomenon.

The person's creation and existence is dependent upon God's faithfulness; however, the choices are their own, free of any violation on God's part in human history. That is to say, while God attempts to influence man's thinking via multiple means, in no way does He tweak their decision, one way or another. Each person is autonomous regarding their volition.

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
This argument brought to you in part by plagiarizing online dictionaries:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=deterministic (American Heritage)

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=free+will (Random House Unabridged)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/obviate (American Heritage)

Don't be a hater. You had to look up plagiarizing before you used it, and I don't see you giving any credit.

Originally posted by Coletti
Not true.

Even if your choice is determined, this does not reduce the possible outcomes to one because possibility describes what the available outcomes are as far as you know them and as far as you believe they are actionable.

The only thing beyond choice are those things you believe are unavailable. Any choice that you believe can be acted on is ...[text shortened]... he possible actions of resistance or compliance. If I knock you out first, all choice is gone.

Even if your choice is determined, this does not reduce the possible outcomes to one because possibility describes what the available outcomes are as far as you know them and as far as you believe they are actionable. COLLETTI

So if I know that eagles can fly of tall buildings and I believe that this is actionable for me then it becomes a possible outcome? Of course not. An action has to be real and potentially possible for it to be a meaningful possible choice that really could be acted on. In a deterministic world I may fantasize about what I might do differently but it 's all fantasy because what I will do is determined.

Originally posted by Coletti
Not true.

Even if your choice is determined, this does not reduce the possible outcomes to one because possibility describes what the available outcomes are as far as you know them and as far as you believe they are actionable.

The only thing beyond choice are those things you believe are unavailable. Any choice that you believe can be acted on is ...[text shortened]... he possible actions of resistance or compliance. If I knock you out first, all choice is gone.

You are a christian (like me) right ? so I don't understand how you can't believe in free will over determinism. In determinism the choice between apple and pear is always fixed. The pear will always be chosen over the apple. The apple will never be chosen so you might as well take it away , it would not affect the outcome if you did. If you put a gun to my head and forced me to choose the pear , same outcome.

In determinism all choices are forced either explicitly or indirectly because all acts have to be entirely predictable and inevitable. The only way this can be is through causation sufficient enough to force the choice otherwise the choice becomes unpredictable and determinism is gone. For example one can say (under determinism) that hitler never ever had a chance to get to heaven and not slaughter millions. It could never have happened. So how can God judge him. He never had a chance.

Determinism is incompatable with Christianity.

Originally posted by dottewell
It's nothing like that; I can, for example, say that I would have acted differently had I had different information, or beliefs, or whatever, or had the circumstances been different, and such statements can be true - even if there were only one way events were actually going to unfold.

It's EXACTLY like that because your chances of "having different information" or having "different beliefs" or having "different circumstances" are 0% . Your chances of being an eagle are 0% also. Having different beliefs is every bit as much out of your reach as being an eagle is. Both are impossible and both are meaningless in terms of any real chance you ever have of doing anything differently. Do you grasp this?

When you say "I could have had different beliefs" it just sounds silly because you might as well say "I could have been an eagle".

Originally posted by dottewell
You continue to misunderstand what choice is. I can choose to eat an apple, or a pear. I select one or the other, for whatever reason. The fact that in those identical circumstances I would always have chosen the same doesn't mean there wasn't a real act of free choosing. I wasn't compelled; I went through an act or reasoning; I chose.

Contrast this wit ...[text shortened]... man stands with a gun to my head and says: "Pick the apple or I'll blow your brains out."

The fact that in those identical circumstances I would always have chosen the same doesn't mean there wasn't a real act of free choosing. I wasn't compelled; I went through an act or reasoning; I chose.
DOTTY


You must have been compelled or under the influence of some force acting on you that was not going to give you any chance of doing anything else. Something causes you to make that choice that forces that choice in a way that means the choice is alwasy predictable. If you weren't compelled by something to eat the pear then one would never be able to predict that you would do that. It would not be inevitable if it wasn't compelled. Do you grasp this?