tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post6174819159996692486..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Dennett & Flanagan, Determinism, Libertarian Free Will, The Evidential POE, and the 'Noseeum' to 'Thereisnun' InferenceRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-13543544288884914572010-05-15T19:53:44.639-04:002010-05-15T19:53:44.639-04:00Sorry, you're comparing apples and oranges. &...Sorry, you're comparing apples and oranges. "God has reasons even if we can't see them" is not the same as "There are causes even if we can't see them." You can disagree with one and agree with the other by the simple fact that you don't believe in God, but do believe in determinism. The arguments don't transmit from one context to another because the context is what it all comes down to. <br /><br />Observation and reason can lead to a deterministic worldview. By that deterministic worldview, there may be things we don't know by our limited biology and psychology.<br /><br />A theological worldview is the result of faith. There is nothing to see and study and measure. There is no evidence to compare and interpret. Either you accept that God exists, of you do not. <br /><br />The argument isn't that "We can't see a God-justifying reason, so there probably isn't one," it's "We can't see a God anywhere, so there isn't a God-justifying reason." Meanwhile, "We can see determinism in many things, so there probably is determinism in things even if we can't see part of it."Daystar Eldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15361685634982067060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-43335156613788121322009-01-13T09:41:00.000-05:002009-01-13T09:41:00.000-05:00Persiflage,I said that atheists argue x doesn't de...Persiflage,<BR/><BR/>I said that atheists argue x doesn't defeat y in one arena and then they say that in an analogous case x defeats y. I pointed out that that seems inconsistent. Now that I've formalized it for you, what's the problem?<BR/><BR/><I>"So you're saying that determinism isn't the logical conclusion to atheism?"</I><BR/><BR/>When people make claims about logical conclusions I want to see the entailments. There are atheists that are libertarian free will action theorists. Indeed, there are naturalists and physicalists that are. <BR/><BR/><I>"But I don't see how Dennett & Flanagan should believe in libertarian free will from the quotes you gave."</I><BR/><BR/>Ummmm, I didn't say they should. I said that they (or those who argue in a similar way) <I>should drop the 'noseeum to thereisnun' inference WRT the evidential problem of evil</I>. They can do that <I>or</I> become LFWs. Why? Because the two arguments seem inconsistent. I thought this was all rather clear. If the evidential noseeum inference is sound to conclude "no God," then why is the other noseeum inference not a reason to conclude "no cause?" Make sense?<BR/><BR/><I>"Dennett argues that the fact that we are not aware of all our causes doesn't necessarily mean those causes do not exist. Flanagan argues that a will that self-causes it's own moral acts is a myth originated from our failure to know all of our causes. They sound like determinists to me."</I><BR/><BR/>Wow. And epic adventure in missing the point.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for telling me what they said when I'm the one who quoted them.<BR/><BR/>I think with that I'll avoid following the rest of your red herring laced trail. I'm sure you can understand.Errorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10615233201833238198noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-41819121765566209492009-01-13T01:35:00.000-05:002009-01-13T01:35:00.000-05:00So you're saying that determinism isn't th...So you're saying that determinism isn't the logical conclusion to atheism?<BR/><BR/>That might not be what you're saying, so I'm not disagreeing with you necessarily. (Also, if the logical conclusion of atheism is determinism, that doesn't mean I should be able to point to the fact that atheists believe in it to show that you Calvinists are wrong.) Determinism could be true with many different ideas of a god who exists. And it could be true if what some hyper-Calvinists argue is correct.<BR/><BR/>Talking with atheists is interesting because ultimately they do believe in the existence of something without a cause - usually just the universe or the cosmos itself.<BR/><BR/>But I don't see how Dennett & Flanagan should believe in libertarian free will from the quotes you gave.<BR/><BR/>Dennett argues that the fact that we are not aware of all our causes doesn't necessarily mean those causes do not exist. Flanagan argues that a will that self-causes it's own moral acts is a myth originated from our failure to know all of our causes. They sound like determinists to me.<BR/><BR/>Not that that's bad. It does seem logical, doesn't it? If our brains are simply the chemical reactions and firing synapses caused by evolution and how our senses react to our surrounding environment, then our surrounding outside environment is ultimately the cause for everything we do. Even the idea of right and wrong is an evolving useful idea that humans have adopted for reasons of survival.<BR/><BR/>Based on this reasoning, if I didn't believe in God, I would be a determinist. Not that you necessarily can't be a determinist if you believe in God - that's the question I'm looking into as we conintue our ongoing discussions.Persiflagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02369952596655284033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-66365099464437199772009-01-11T22:12:00.000-05:002009-01-11T22:12:00.000-05:00They could remain determinists on a metaphysical b...They could remain determinists on a metaphysical basis despite the fact that their oberservations would lead them to believe in libertarian free will. If they see no evidence for causes for human action, then the causes have no transition that could be measured, so that the human will moves by an impersonal force that drags them through life, which cannot be known by humans.Vytautashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10563655929016752682noreply@blogger.com