This is exactly what I am talking about. There is surely a reason this debate exists and continues to exist among philosophers, and I don't think anybody here is really able to fully understand this debate.
It's literally just the belief that the universe is a closed, predictable system without any actually chaotic elements. Therefore, everything is a result of the things that preceded it in one massive causal chain going back to the Big Bang and before.
There's some stuff at the most fundamental levels of physics that chaos is one hypothesis for but there's no current reason to privilege that hypothesis over others, and in any case once you get above the subatomic level things start behaving incredibly predictably again.
There absolutely is. Neuroscience is still in its infant stages, and the hows and whys of the "neurological impulses" you're talking about is still being researched and debated.
Metaphysical frameworks ≠ automatic assumption of some spiritual element. Arguments for and against free will, or compatibilism, all rely on some metaphysical framework.
If you have a side in the argument, that's fine. I'm not going to debate with you if free will is right or wrong, because I doubt we'll get anywhere if we do disagree. But I think you would do well to understand what words like "metaphysics" entail.
It's a complex topic. I'd agree that at the lower level, it is very easy to justify something like rehabilitation and restorative justice. But once you start climbing the ladder in terms of atrocities, especially with contingent factors like ideologies etc, the whole discourse starts to become muddled. I don't think there's a one size fits all approach.
The whole "free will vs determinism" debate is the #4471468716499184th internet debate where neither side is qualified to speak.
I'd rather never speak a word in my life than try to talk about shit I don't understand.
Sorry for making such a weird/hostile post, I'm feeling a bit stressed out rn.
deleted by creator
Your use of the term "metaphysics" makes me question whether you've actually engaged with any of the literature on free will.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
This is exactly what I am talking about. There is surely a reason this debate exists and continues to exist among philosophers, and I don't think anybody here is really able to fully understand this debate.
deleted by creator
Well, at least we can agree that vindictive justice isn't sound
deleted by creator
This is incoherent. What does this even mean? It seems like you're just throwing out stuff after some cursory reading you did online
It's literally just the belief that the universe is a closed, predictable system without any actually chaotic elements. Therefore, everything is a result of the things that preceded it in one massive causal chain going back to the Big Bang and before.
There's some stuff at the most fundamental levels of physics that chaos is one hypothesis for but there's no current reason to privilege that hypothesis over others, and in any case once you get above the subatomic level things start behaving incredibly predictably again.
deleted by creator
There absolutely is. Neuroscience is still in its infant stages, and the hows and whys of the "neurological impulses" you're talking about is still being researched and debated.
Metaphysical frameworks ≠ automatic assumption of some spiritual element. Arguments for and against free will, or compatibilism, all rely on some metaphysical framework.
If you have a side in the argument, that's fine. I'm not going to debate with you if free will is right or wrong, because I doubt we'll get anywhere if we do disagree. But I think you would do well to understand what words like "metaphysics" entail.
deleted by creator
It's a complex topic. I'd agree that at the lower level, it is very easy to justify something like rehabilitation and restorative justice. But once you start climbing the ladder in terms of atrocities, especially with contingent factors like ideologies etc, the whole discourse starts to become muddled. I don't think there's a one size fits all approach.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator