9
Free Will Is Real And You Better Believe It (philosophyofbalance.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/philosophy@lemmy.world
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

I don’t think Spinoza’s God can be called an agent, exactly—at least not an active one. To be an agent, there have to be future states of the world you can’t (yet) predict, because those are the only states your current actions can have an effect on.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Yes, I was trying to draw the analogy, but I agree it wouldn't be an active agent at least.

    But bringing back to where we came from: The problematic part to me is still whether a deterministic universe is compatible with free will. I mean, I don't think they're compatible, but you said it depends on whether an omniscient agent exists. I still don't see how that follows. If the omniscient agent exists, and it is indeed an active agent, then by definition the universe wouldn't be deterministic, no?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Sure... I was just addressing why determinism might make us feel like our free will was in jeopardy—I wasn’t implying that it was a logical possibility.

    Like I said, I think it’s an instinctive feeling rather than a logical one. Like if you’re playing cards and you realize your cards are visible, you feel like the game is compromised—even if the other players can’t see them in practice.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent