[OT] Plato's Pub and Philosophical Society

[Krsqk]

I realize this is going back one topic, but if everything we think and do is pre-determined, there is no legality or illegality. No one is responsible for their actions, and thus, any attempt to punish or reward behavior is immoral. Of course, one could also say that people try to promote behavior similar to their own, and that such "persuasion" is also pre-determined. Then, one's own behaviors are not merely the result of which set of chemical signals in one's head is strongest, but which set of outside behaviors triggers the strongest response in oneself.

[Phoenix-D]

"No one is responsible for their actions, and thus, any attempt to punish or reward behavior is immoral"

If everything is pre-determined there is -no such thing- as immoral.

Phoenix-D

[Krsqk]

Okay, so I'm redefining immoral without saying so. Perhaps I should just say that attempting to regulate human behavior would be to deny pre-determined human behavior...except that then said denial would be pre-determined behavior.

I don't see how one can have both the legitimate rule of law and predeterminism.

I guess it would be like taking agnosticism one step further: "Nothing can ever be known...including what 'nothing' means."

[dogscoff]

I don't see how one can have both the legitimate rule of law and predeterminism.

You couldn't have anything else, beacuse it is determined that we will have...

Seriously, the problem isn't with determinism but with the atheistic universe that determinism relies on. Whether physics allow only one future or many, I still believe we are all just little pockets of order emerging from infinite chaos.

I'm an atheist (but not a determinist) and as such I believe in a universe where morality is nothing more than a human concept- the result of our sociable monkey heritage fine-tuned by several thousand years of applied philosophy. When we do finally meet intelligent alien life, we are going to have to open whole new universities just to cope with the new branches of philosophy introduced by their non-monkey ancestry.

As a human concept though, I still believe morality has value, because we made it and we place value upon it and it holds our society together (or pretends it does. )

[ March 26, 2003, 09:47: Message edited by: dogscoff ]

[Chronon]

Originally posted by dogscoff:
As a human concept though, I still believe morality has value, because we made it and we place value upon it and it holds our society together (or pretends it does. )

Ah yes, the pragmatic position. I agree with you on this one.

In any orderly society (or perhaps I should say functioning society) there needs to be some set of rules by which people live (or strive to live, anyway). In some societies there have been more religious moralities, and in some more civic or secular (and the whole continuum in between). That is why the whole question of universal morality and universal truth is so problematic. Essentially it's just cultural hegemony: the imposition of one peoples' set of values/morals over another's.

[ March 26, 2003, 13:23: Message edited by: Chronon ]

[Suicide Junkie]

Seriously, the problem isn't with determinism but with the atheistic universe that determinism relies on.

Does it really?
1) God creates universe (including past, present and future from out point of view)
2) He likes his finished masterpiece, frames it and hangs it on his wall.

[dogscoff]

It's a valid point S_J, except that I don't know of any theistic belief systems where that happens. They all seem to have God(s) mucking about in human affairs one way or another.

But yeah, it would make quite a cool religion. Maybe I'll start me a cult...

[QuarianRex]

Looking at free-will vs. the illusion of free-will, can anyone tell me the difference? Is there a practical difference between free-will and the illusion?

When I say "illusion of free-will" I mean that in the sense of determinism, not in the "I am autnomous free agent, unaffected by my environment", obviously false, sense.

If our fates are predetermined, why are we allowed to see things otherwise? If we see things as a product of free-will how is that different from such things being a product of free-will. I it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...

[Suicide Junkie]

I imagine it is very much the same as the aged creation type stuff we saw come up a while ago in this very thread.

No way to tell for sure, and in this case the logical answer is to live your life as if you have free will.
If you don't and you think you do, no big deal, it was bound to happen.
If you do and think you don't, well then you've got a problem.

Doesn't stop us from posting interesting theories, though, and its a much friendlier topic

[Fyron]

I think some people are confusing determinism with predestination. The two are wholely unrelated concepts.