this post was submitted on
58 points (71% like it)
97 up votes 39 down votes

philosophy

unsubscribe95,582 readers

~67 users here now

New to philosophy? Click here.

Need book suggestions? Check out our recommended reading list.

Posting guidelines:

This is not a forum for idle musings. If you are posing a question, make sure to weigh in on your own question first.

Submit quotations or pictures within the body of a self-post; links to picture submissions will be automatically removed.

If you need help with homework, please ask at /r/askphilosophy first.

Other, more specialized, philosophy sub-reddits:

Check out #reddit-philosophy on Freenode!

a community for

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

all 17 comments

[–]oldmoneey 7 points8 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I just don't like it when they say it depends on findings in modern neuroscience, that detracts from the credibility for those who are opposed to this.

The neuroscience aspect isn't even necessary for the concept.

[–]LaziestManAlive 1 point2 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And most studies that cite neuroscience are very poorly misunderstood, and rather ambiguous. The most famous one I can think of off the top of my head is where regions of the brain responsible for action light up before those of awareness, indicating that the action was long decided upon in your brain before you realized you were making the decision. These studies are limited to very simple actions. Through the course of human evolution, quick-witted responses to predators or perceived danger were ones that were favored by natural selection, but this process and methodology does not translate to higher level thinking, like if I were to systematically consider my motives and desires when it comes to deciding if I want to be with a person or not.

[–]JavaMonn 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Is this a real book, or is it a shop? I love those text adventure books.

[–]KingCHUD 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

WHAT THE FUCK IS ON PAGE 72!!?

[–]progre77 5 points6 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

57 here I come

[–]marshgrass24 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

you can just close the book, that way youd win

[–]LaziestManAlive 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

"If you choose not to decide

you still have made a choice!"

[–]tuhan 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Rush, oh yeah!

[–]marshgrass24 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

True but it said basically it knew you'd go to that page so by closing the book you'd show that you have free will

[–]LaziestManAlive 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It's a song lyric :)

[–]no1113 3 points4 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

All our actions and decisions are indeed merely the machinations of a predetermined universe. Our concept of free will is indeed naught but an illusion. All this is what in Philosophy circles is called a trivial truth, however, for we humans scarcely know what the ultimate limits are behind the realities of either free will or predetermination. We do not know what they, in truth, mean in the greater context of the entire universe. Our feeble brains draw a blank in these areas that we are not even intelligent enough to acknowledge we're even doing.

This is to say that telling a human that it is limited in its will is like telling a quark that it only has the Milky Way to travel through, outside of which it is not allowed. It's range of travel is "limited" to only this galaxy, in other words. How long do you think it would take something the size of a quark to be able to traverse the entirety of this galaxy alone? This is to say that it is an absolute absurdity to lament a limitation not even a fraction of whose extent we are likely to ever even come close to expiring or reaching.

It's like giving someone 5 billion trillion dollars and telling them that they can "only" spend 4 billion trillion of it.

[–]Tac0s 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Can someone explain to me why he can't stop thinking about 56? Is there a joke in there somewhere?

[–]drunkentune[S] 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[–]Tac0s 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Oh, I didn't even know about the wrong way of thinking about determinism and free will.

[–]tuhan 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Now posting that here was just mean

[–]blazingtruth 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I actually think this is pretty accurate...

[–]cornball1111 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

pretty funny