Re: Determinism Fail

[Formelyknown]

 

 

Only determinist can call others insane because they are able to understand a planes can't copulate with a bird even if both can flies.

 

People who believe in free will are so stupid that that they can't tell the difference between large heavy flying machines and birds. Determinists are smart enough to know there is a difference.

If you are a determinist then you don't need to be responsible for the things that you say, or your spelling or your grammar.

 

Furthermore, free-willis can't understand that showing someone's bad free-will arguments doesn't make him a determinist. Yes, I don't care about grammar. I wish we change it for a more efficient language. Plus, it help me to see if someone are more interested about the arguments then the font him using.

[Kevin Beal]

 

If you are a determinist then you don't need to be responsible for the things that you say, or your spelling or your grammar.

True, what's your point?

 

The point is what I said. What I said was my point.

Okay that's two determinists so far who've stated they aren't responsible for what they do (and two more in the youtube comment thread). One might be led to conclude that this is the point of determinism: to avoid the problems of responsibility (in themselves and others). It also might explain Stef's hesitation to talk about determinism with determinists.

Determinism is very anti-UPB: you are responsible, but I'm not. You have to live consistently with you you preach, but I don't.

[Stefan Molyneux]

 

If he's pre-determined to interrupt and overwhelm the conversation, then
why do determinists bother to keep trying to convince him?

Because the future hasn't happened yet, and we're all part of the future unfurling in front of us. People's behaviour matters with respect to what's going to happen, even though they may not have the fundamental free will to decide what they're going to do.

Me deterministically writing down these argument for you may effect your mind in such a way that you become convinced of my position. Deterministic processes can change minds.

 

Right, this is what it always comes down to. You believe in morality, you believe in changing people's minds, you believe in personal responsibility – you accept everything that I accept, you just call it determinism, and I call it free will, but there's no material difference in any of the conclusions, so why quibble about terms?

[prohexa]

 

 

Right, this is what it always comes down to. You believe in morality, you believe in changing people's minds, you believe in personal responsibility – you accept everything that I accept, you just call it determinism, and I call it free will, but there's no material difference in any of the conclusions, so why quibble about terms?

 

This is exactly the point I was trying to make before; either we have free will, or we have something else that is indistinguishable from free will. Either way, the same moral rules and ethics apply...

 

[JanC]

The point is what I said. What I said was my point.

 

 

 

 

Okay that's two determinists so far who've stated they aren't responsible for what they do (and two more in the youtube comment thread). One might be led to conclude that this is the point of determinism: to avoid the problems of responsibility (in themselves and others). It also might explain Stef's hesitation to talk about determinism with determinists.

Determinism is very anti-UPB: you are responsible, but I'm not. You have to live consistently with you you preach, but I don't.

Sorry, need to clarify this. It depends on what you mean by responsible. People are not responsible in the sense that they couldn't have acted differently at the time. But they are responsible in the sense that they did it (e.g. act unkindly). Confronting people with that might make them act differently the next time.

No double standards here.

 

[Stefan Molyneux]

 Right, like if you lecture a rock that fell on your car, it might fall differently next time.