I'm using the term LFW to describe the way in which are conscious minds think. I'm using the basic, classic sense of the term.
We think we CHDO. The conclusion we jump to is that means in the exact situation, it's not how our conscious minds think as you put it, it's just an intellectual error.
I have no idea what you are talking about when you say the "correct interpretation of could have done otherwise."
And yet you have because I gave the example that I could have eaten eggs, which you agreed with. So you know what I'm saying I believe is the correct interpretation of CHDO.
Again with your bent towards "correct circumstances" I'm guessing you are drifting off into your own ideals, mores, and subjective interpretations on how people should think.
It's more a question of what we are thinking about, what possibilities really are.
And yes people should get this right because this is the real reason we've evolved to think about what we could have done and getting that right helps in all sorts of ways.
You disbelieve that LFW is a mistake over CHDO.
That's about it I think.
What in god's name are you talking about? You are bothered!
The main point of disagreement is you disbelieve that LFW is an intellectual error over the interpretation of CHDO.
That's it isn't it?
Ok. What is the difference of LFW(your definition) and "the interpretation of CHDO"?
LFW is CHDO In the exact situation in a way that makes us ultimately responsible for the choice by bringing all the circumstances within our control, as opposed to : circumstances beyond our control would have had to be different for us to have done otherwise.
LFW is logically impossible. If we CHDO with our brains in just the same state, no choice between options would have been made at all because it would not have been up to us in any sense at all which option we selected. You will kick yourself when you see this. LFW can't possibly make sense of anything it is literally impossible.
I don't know what you mean by the "interpretation of could have done otherwise."
Like my eggs example. This is the real reason to praise and blame etc
Edit: What I mean is my definition of LFW is one interpretation of CHDO and my eggs example is another. The eggs example being the correct interpretation.
The judge wouldn't think he was Causally-Determined to punish you. The judge would need to think that you could have chosen NOT to do the things he is judging you for.
And that is exactly what he will be thinking. Like every person from the beginning of time.
And here is the same error over and over again. In the first place, humans are determined future anticipating machines. That means that they choose. You don't need LFW for that.
In the second place the judge is right: you could have chosen to do otherwise: if you had wanted to do otherwise. Raskolnikov is punished because he killed his landlady and her sister and he wanted to. That's it. You do not need a 'could have done otherwise with exactly the same brain state for that'. Here]. Read it.
Nobody is actually choosing to begin with.
Wrong. Why wouldn't a 'determined future anticipating machine' not choose? Because it is determined? Such a machine has options! Please explain.
If I asked anybody on the streets who was choosing something off of a menu: "Are you choosing those foods of your own free-will?" They would say yes.
If I asked someone who was spanking a child if they thought the child deserved it, they would say yes.
If I asked them what the child could have done-or not done-to avoid the spanking they would say, "The child should not have used curse words."
Then I could say, "So the child chose to use curse words?" And the parent would reply, "Of course! I already told the child not to swear."
Yes, we think in terms of free will. If you mean LFW, then no. Maybe most western people think in this terms. But they are wrong, and a little bit of thinking shows why. From then on one can see that we are determined and have free will. Compatibilist Free Will.
So you see, this above in italics is a small example of how we all consciously think in terms of Free-will. It's Determined that we have this hardwiring. We didn't culturally learn this. We evolved this process of thinking. I can't believe you would think otherwise.
A majority of philosophers think so. So better believe it. And presenting us with a just-so story why we can only be able to think we have LFW is not really an argument.
Your only problems is that you think this is cultural(nurture).
It is your problem that you think it is hardwired.
I know for a fact that it is Evolved and is a part of our consciousness, just like love, fear, knowledge etc...
For Fact? Your just-so story counts as fact?
Nobody likes to be judged for example. Most people like to be praised.
Well, but a lot of people like to judge.
Listen VYAZMA, we are talking about two different concepts of free will here: LFW and CFW. LFW is wrong, so nobody should stick to it. CFW covers nearly everything we are used to connect to free will, except the idea that our will is uncaused. But that idea does not come from experience, and when we analyse it, it turns out to be incoherent. So is there a reason why we should stick to this idea? And then you come with a rational reconstruction with how the idea got into our brains! That is not a reason.
You whole point is empty fantasising. Did you have interviews with stone age people about how they see the problem of free will?
LFW is CHDO In the exact situation in a way that makes us ultimately responsible for the choice by bringing all the circumstances within our control as opposed to : circumstances beyond our control would have had to be different for us to have done otherwise.
LFW is logically impossible. If we CHDO with our brains in just the same state, no choice between options would have been made at all because it would not have been up to us in any sense at all which option we selected. You will kick yourself when you see this. LFW can't possibly make sense of anything it is literally impossible.
There is no such thing as other circumstances in the same instance Stephen. Exact or otherwise.
I know that LFW is physically impossible. That doesn't stop all humans(including yourself) from consciously thinking like it is.
Why are you so caught up in states and circumstances?
"Circumstances beyond our control would have had to be different for us to have done otherwise."All circumstances are beyond our control. Or do you believe in LFW?
What circumstances do you control Stephen? I know you said you controlled your dog...what else?
I thought you understood Determinism Stephen? Determinism would most definitely dictate that all circumstances are out of everyone's and everything's Control.
Humans have a consciousness that tricks us into thinking we do have Control by choosing and steering. It's evolutionary, and it's how DNA found a pathway to survival. It has to be connected with memory and social interaction.
Unfortunately this is a very tough thing for people to get their heads around.
1. They don't grasp the true implications of Causal Determinism on a Physical level. Because consciousness doesn't really exist on a Physical Level does it? I mean it actually does but, well you get the picture. Try explaining that to your average Joe. Most people think they have souls or inner-selves. A minds eye. Etc etc...It's all just tricks. Illusions. This is all connected to Number 2....
2. They witness themselves and others "controlling" things.
I guess you might have this conundrum yourself.
You whole point is empty fantasising. Did you have interviews with stone age people about how they see the problem of free will?
Then tell me when people began to first think that they or others were able to take more than one possible course of action under a given set of circumstances.
Those circumstances being all the circumstances that exist in that instance.
When did people start blaming or praising people?
When did you say, the Second Century... :lol:
Humans have a consciousness that tricks us into thinking we do have Control by choosing and steering. It's evolutionary, and it's how DNA found a pathway to survival. It has to be connected with memory and social interaction.
Seems to me the most likely explanation for that working is that we do choose and steer.
Anyhow the point is the reason you think we are wired up to believe in LFW is you don't accept it's just a mistake over the correct interpretation of CHDO.
That's what this is about at base.
And that's something, to understand why we disgree, at least.
The point is it's logically impossible
So says you. But you think it all the time. You already said you praised your dog.
You already said you had a better idea for blame or reward...that in itself is thinking in terms of LFW.
You think it at least a hundred times a day.
You whole point is empty fantasising. Did you have interviews with stone age people about how they see the problem of free will?
Then tell me when people began to first think that they or others were able to take more than one possible course of action under a given set of circumstances.
Those circumstances being all the circumstances that exist in that instance.
When did people start blaming or praising people?
When did you say, the Second Century... :lol:
Yes the mistake has been going on longer than that.
But still it's a mistake over the meaning of 'the circumstances'. I know I can eat scrambled eggs for breakfast because I've seen myself do it.
What this takes is to not narrow the meaning of 'the circumstances' to exactly as they are. The meaning is more like' in these sorts of circumstances'.
And this can be worked out by looking at how I know I'm able to eat scrambled eggs for breakfast and watching how we use language.
Seems to me the most likely explanation for that working is that we do choose and steer.
Hopefully you are aware that it only seems like you are observing people choose and steer.
Otherwise you believe in Free-Will as far as I can tell.
Choosing is doing something other than what is Causally Determined.
Sure we observe people "choosing". That's because we are hardwired to consciously think that way.
You are familiar with Determinism aren't you? Causality?
The point is it's logically impossible
Physically impossible trumps that Stephen. What's left?
Logic? No, only what we perceive to be happening through consciousness.
But that's what you call illogical. Which is ridiculous. It simply is that way.
Hopefully you are aware that it only seems like you are observing people choose and steer.
Otherwise you believe in Free-Will as far as I can tell.
Then you are not sticking to my definition of LFW.
Choosing is doing something other than what is Causally Determined.
That really is rubbish , sorry. Choosing is to evaluate options and act upon the best option according to the evaluation. Computers do it, though you choose to ignore that inconvenient fact.
So is there a reason why we should stick to this idea? And then you come with a rational reconstruction with how the idea got into our brains! That is not a reason.
Really? How did the idea get in anybody's brain? You talking about it right now.
How did the idea get in your brain?
That really is rubbish , sorry. Choosing is to evaluate options and act upon the best option according to the evaluation and circumstances!
Obviously you have trouble taking all the circumstances into account.
All the circumstances! People never do. I don't either. If we did take all the circumstances into account we would all be hard determinists and
would realize we weren't really choosing at all.
But that's impossible. Humans are not capable of taking all the circumstances into account.
Hence the illusion of free-will. You just "choose" according to how you were determined to do so anyways.
The point is it's logically impossible
Physically impossible trumps that Stephen. What's left?
Logic? No, only what we perceive to be happening through consciousness.
But that's what you call illogical. Which is ridiculous. It simply is that way.
You really are missing the point.
Imagine choosing to eat salmon.
Now replay the tape with everything the same including your brain states and the words "I'll have the steak " coming out of your mouth instead.
It just has nothing to do with you which words come out of your mouth, so rather than the choice becoming entirely up to you, it ends up having nothing to do with you at all.
That's why it's logically impossible and why it won't make any sense to think this is hard wired for some evolutionary purpose.
That really is rubbish , sorry. Choosing is to evaluate options and act upon the best option according to the evaluation and circumstances!
Obviously you have trouble taking all the circumstances into account.
All the circumstances! People never do. I don't either. If we did take all the circumstances into account we would all be hard determinists and
would realize we weren't really choosing at all.
But that's impossible. Humans are not capable of taking all the circumstances into account.
Hence the illusion of free-will. You just "choose" according to how you were determined to do so anyways.
There is nothing about not being determined in my definition of choice. Choices rather seem determined to me, the option selected is determined by the selection process.
Then tell me when people began to first think that they or others were able to take more than one possible course of action under a given set of circumstances.
Those circumstances being all the circumstances that exist in that instance.
Your stone age interviewee was making this difference?
When did people start blaming or praising people?
As long as you stick to the idea that blaming and praising can only be done when you believe in LFW this question is useless. You can also blame people with the idea of CFW.