Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Started by Philosofer123, December 05, 2013, 07:06:24 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 9 10 11
User actions

josephpalazzo

#150
December 10, 2013, 01:50:07 PM
Quote from: "Biodome"
Quote from: "Bibliofagus"
Quote from: "Biodome"In the compatibilist theory of free will, you are able to choose to act on your motives, but you are not responsible for the motives themselves. "You can do what you will, but you cannot will what you will."

It's still determinism right? As in: There is only one possible outcome?

Yes, the compatibilist view accepts determinism, but they do not think that this contradicts free will, since they define it as: "the freedom to act according to one's determined motives without arbitrary hindrance from other individuals or institutions". It is not freedom to choose (i.e. in a completely identical situation and circumstances you would always make the same choice), but it is freedom to act on one's own desires.

The problem with the compatibilist position is that motives/desires are the effect of certain causes - some are conscious, some are unconscious - and therefore by redefining free will in this manner, this is basically pushing the goalposts.

Biodome

#151
December 10, 2013, 03:01:36 PM
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"
Quote from: "Biodome"Yes, the compatibilist view accepts determinism, but they do not think that this contradicts free will, since they define it as: "the freedom to act according to one's determined motives without arbitrary hindrance from other individuals or institutions". It is not freedom to choose (i.e. in a completely identical situation and circumstances you would always make the same choice), but it is freedom to act on one's own desires.

The problem with the compatibilist position is that motives/desires are the effect of certain causes - some are conscious, some are unconscious - and therefore by redefining free will in this manner, this is basically pushing the goalposts.

Of course our motives are predetermined, but that is irrelevant to their definition of free will. You can say that it's pushing the goalpoasts, but I have no problem with that definition of free will. Free will in the ultimate sense of being able to create and control your future does not exist, but one does not need to be free in the ultimate sense to feel free. That feeling is satisfactory for most.

josephpalazzo

#152
December 10, 2013, 03:10:17 PM
Quote from: "Biodome"
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"
Quote from: "Biodome"Yes, the compatibilist view accepts determinism, but they do not think that this contradicts free will, since they define it as: "the freedom to act according to one's determined motives without arbitrary hindrance from other individuals or institutions". It is not freedom to choose (i.e. in a completely identical situation and circumstances you would always make the same choice), but it is freedom to act on one's own desires.

The problem with the compatibilist position is that motives/desires are the effect of certain causes - some are conscious, some are unconscious - and therefore by redefining free will in this manner, this is basically pushing the goalposts.

Of course our motives are predetermined, but that is irrelevant to their definition of free will. You can say that it's pushing the goalpoasts, but I have no problem with that definition of free will. Free will in the ultimate sense of being able to create and control your future does not exist, but one does not need to be free in the ultimate sense to feel free. That feeling is satisfactory for most.


If the compatibilist position is make us all feel good by making us all feel we have free will, even though technically/semantically for lack of better words we don't have it, how can I argue against that?  :P

Biodome

#153
December 10, 2013, 03:16:21 PM
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"If the compatibilist position is make us all feel good by making us all feel we have free will, even though technically/semantically for lack of better words we don't have it, how can I argue against that?  :P

I guess they just want to make a distinction between a person who has motives and cannot act upon them and a person that has motives and is able to act upon them. "Free will"? I guess it is suitable for the task. Of course, one cannot get rid of all possible ambiguities due to tons of definitions. Every human chooses the one which fits them best...

Bibliofagus

#154
December 10, 2013, 03:41:52 PM
Quote from: "Biodome"Yes, the compatibilist view accepts determinism, but they do not think that this contradicts free will, since they define it as: "the freedom to act according to one's determined motives without arbitrary hindrance from other individuals or institutions". It is not freedom to choose (i.e. in a completely identical situation and circumstances you would always make the same choice), but it is freedom to act on one's own desires.

Thank you. Didn't know about that. I had some questions but your conversation with palazzo covers these nicely.
So I guess I should thank you both.
Quote from: \"the_antithesis\"Faith says, "I believe this and I don\'t care what you say, I cannot possibly be wrong." Faith is an act of pride.

Quote from: \"AllPurposeAtheist\"The moral high ground was dug up and made into a walmart apparently today.

Tornadoes caused: 2, maybe 3.

TrueStory

#155
December 10, 2013, 04:01:52 PM
This should be on a demotivational poster to make sense:
Asks for critique of philosophy of life.
All critiques deemed, "not worth the time".
Please don't take anything I say seriously.

Biodome

#156
December 10, 2013, 04:50:09 PM
Quote from: "TrueStory"This should be on a demotivational poster to make sense:
Asks for critique of philosophy of life.
All critiques deemed, "not worth the time".

Philosofer123

#157
February 22, 2014, 03:15:32 PM
Please note that I have revised the "Negative hedonism" section of the document.

I have also added a new section entitled "Beyond peace of mind".

I look forward to any helpful feedback you may have.

aitm

#158
February 22, 2014, 11:05:01 PM
Quote from: "Philosofer123"Over the past few years, I have formulated my philosophy of life
Okay.

QuotePlease note that I have revised the "Negative hedonism" section of the document.

ah wat?


QuoteI have also added a new section entitled "Beyond peace of mind".
.

aw wat?


Oh you mean you are still formulating.....okay..... one should really be more careful with the making them damn statements as if they are...you know..statments.
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

Biodome

#159
February 23, 2014, 03:15:50 AM
Oh no... Oh no... It returns...

Casparov

#160
April 11, 2014, 01:23:45 AM
I was excited to read the document and then very let down to discover that the link no longer works...

I am willing to offer a critique OP if you are still requesting them.
“The Fanatical Atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures whoâ€"in their grudge against traditional religion as the "opium of the masses"â€"cannot hear the music of other spheres.” - Albert Einstein

Philosofer123

#161
April 20, 2014, 03:18:49 PM
Quote from: Casparov on April 11, 2014, 01:23:45 AM
I was excited to read the document and then very let down to discover that the link no longer works...

I am willing to offer a critique OP if you are still requesting them.

The link in the OP should still work.  That said, you may find another copy of the document at the following link:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/183418623/My-Philosophy-of-Life

I look forward to your critique.

Solitary

#162
April 21, 2014, 04:55:39 PM
I agree with almost everything you say accept I believe death is only harmful to those that love you. Solitary
There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 9 10 11
User actions