Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jamesj t1_j98aavi wrote

Reply to comment by Ytar0 in Compatibilism is supported by deep intuitions about responsibility and control. It can also feel "obviously" wrong and absurd. Slavoj Žižek's commentary can help us navigate the intuitive standoff. by matthewharlow

Sure, but why is that called compatibilism and not illusionism, which seems like a much more appropriate label? It just feels to me that compatibilists want the claim that free will is compatible with determinism (because they are physicalists who like the idea of moral responsibility) more than they want clarity around the words "free will".

10

Ytar0 t1_j98c0mi wrote

Well, not all philosophers are very "compatible" themselves lol. But that aside, yes you might call that flavor of compatibilism, illusionism. But for the most part, I think they just have a different definition of free will. I.e. one that isn't:

  • If someone acts of their own free will, then they could have done otherwise (A-C).
  • If determinism is true, no one can do otherwise than one actually does (D-E).
  • Therefore, if determinism is true, no one acts of her own free will (F).

Compatibilism reminds me of Absurdism, in that you're embracing "the absurd" (even though it's a slightly different absurd here lol)

4

Atilla_The_Honey t1_j99xtdn wrote

I’ve seen something like this argument before and I wonder if you can clarify it for me. In the first premise, what does “could have done otherwise” mean? That if they had decided to do otherwise, they could have?

Surely in a deterministic universe this could still be true, because the deciding to do otherwise would be part of the causal chain leading them to act, so changing that part could change the resulting action.

I don’t really understand the second premise either - surely whether the universe is deterministic or not, once an action has been taken it can’t be changed. Can you clarify how someone could do otherwise than they actually do in any kind of universe?

I think I broadly agree that the article above is arguing from a different conception of free will, in a rather sneaky way.

3

dirtmother t1_j9acftr wrote

Compatibilism often reads to me as, "I will express my moral intuition, and I never could have done otherwise".

Correct me if I'm wrong lol.

1

Ytar0 t1_j99z04n wrote

Determinism ultimately means that there only is one possible future. And that all actions will inevitably lead to that future. From an outside perspective we are simply following the laws of casualty.

So “deciding to do otherwise” means creating a different future, one where you has done otherwise than what was predetermined. Idk if that makes more sense.

0

jamesj t1_j993fmi wrote

That's interesting because absurdism appeals to me quite a lot while compatibilism makes little sense to me at all.

2

Ytar0 t1_j9bwkg6 wrote

Hmm. Then let me ask you some, since I am not sure how to relate to incompatibilists. Are you at all times aware that whatever you choose to do (and chose to do) is outside of your control?? Because for the life of me I have never felt that I wasn't free in my actions. And while this might be an illusion (I am a determinist after all) I will never and don't believe I ever can be aware of how this changes anything in my life. (since I simply am not given this information)

What do you think about that ^ ?

2

jamesj t1_j9bzbrb wrote

Yes, there are two important levels where things are outside of my control: first, i didn't choose my place of birth, language, parents, schools, upbringing, and what ideas I was exposed to. Second, I conceive of my self as a subset of my brain and body, and at a deep level I don't believe that part of me is in control. I'm along for the ride, and I experience stories about why things happen, some of those stories involving the idea of choices, but I don't believe all of those stories.

2

Ytar0 t1_j9cvzbv wrote

Hmm yeah, I guess it’s too hard for me to truly explain my pov. But to put it another way, while the concept of objective truths might exist in this universe, I don’t believe we could ever know them, since we’re always bound by the confines of our brains, and our perspective. Your experience and subjective opinion is just as valid is mine, I just argue that “being along for the ride” is the same as what compatibilists call “free will”. Because this “ride” isn’t one you know or can wholly predict, and it also feels the same as if it weren’t a ride. The difference is unknowable imo.

1