Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Immanuel Can »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 1:55 am Acausality is purely negative and as negative can neither be proven or disproven.
No, "acauasality" could be easily, easily disproven...just find or demonstrate the real cause, and you've done it for that item, phenomenon or event.

What "acausality" apparently cannot be is shown with reference to anything.
Age
Posts: 20193
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:38 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 3:17 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:34 am

1. You are projecting your own deflection.

REALLY?

Some can SEE and are SAYING that this appears to be an attempt at DEFLECTION, projected, itself.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:34 am The truth is that there are many truths and this truth is a singular entity as a singular truth.
OF COURSE, there are MANY, so called, "truths". Each and EVERY one of 'you', adult human beings, has and holds their OWN, so called, "truth".

Also, so if 'this truth' is a singular entity as a 'singular truth', then does that mean that 'this truth' is irrefutable?

If yes, then does that now make 'this irrefutable truth' absolute?

And if yes, then would that now make 'this irrefutable and absolute truth', 'A truth of things'?

If yes, the I just refer to this kind or type of 'truth' as 'thee ACTUAL Truth of things', or shortened, 'thee Truth', which just makes expressing 'that thing' SIMPLER and EASIER.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:34 am 2. The singular totality of being exists through many grades/images, each grade/image is a microcosm of the macrocosm.
OF COURSE.

Contrary to YOUR BELIEF 'this' has NEVER been DISPUTED.

What I did was ask you to PROVIDE an EXAMPLE of the 'a "specific thing", which you were 'trying to' CLAIM NOT everyone agrees with, which you THEN 'tried to' CLAIM was "one singular truth".

Talk about DEFLECTION.

To me, there are SOME 'things' that EVERY one does AGREE ON, so if this is True, then that would REFUTE your CLAIM here. And then, this THE OPPOSITE of YOUR CLAIM would NOW become 'one singular (irrefutable and absolute) Truth. Surely this NOT to HARD NOR COMPLEX to UNDERSTAND?

Also, the ONLY other thing I did here was to ask you, 'one WHAT, exists though many WHAT/S?'

What can be SEEN here is you have FAILED to answer my CLARIFYING QUESTION posed to you, as well as FAILING to PROVIDE an EXAMPLE of what I CHALLENGED you about.

Now, if you had been Truly OPEN and Honest, by PROVIDING BOTH the EXAMPLE and the ANSWER, then we could have come together in AGREEMENT, MUCH EARLIER, MUCH SIMPLER, MUCH QUICKER, and MUCH EASIER than we are going to now.
1. The constant nature of the truth being "there are multiple truths" necessitates it as absolute. Absoluteness is consistency.
So, to just CLARIFY, to be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN, what does the 'it' word here refer to, EXACTLY?

2. One form exists through many forms, this form is a loop as a form whose beginning is the same as the end when traced.
[/quote]

Yes 'we' ALREADY KNEW this. Quite 'some time' ago too, if thee Truth be KNOWN.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Terrapin Station »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 1:38 am I'm pointing out that empirically is a way to set the burden of proof.
Why would it be "a way to 'set' the burden of proof" when we're talking about something that has nothing to do with actualized, empirical facts?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Immanuel Can »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:29 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 1:38 am I'm pointing out that empirically is a way to set the burden of proof.
Why would it be "a way to 'set' the burden of proof" ...
Because "burden of proof" means the question of who has something to prove. The person who believes in causality has nothing to prove, because his way of thinking is the most obvious one, the one with all the evidence already. That's empirical. The believer in "acausality" has everything to prove, because nobody has a single case of what he's claiming exists, and his idea is counterintuitive, non-evidentiary and plausibly fictive.

But you know that, if you know what "burden of proof" means. And I won't insult you by assuming you don't.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Terrapin Station »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 1:04 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:29 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 1:38 am I'm pointing out that empirically is a way to set the burden of proof.
Why would it be "a way to 'set' the burden of proof" ...
Because "burden of proof" means the question of who has something to prove. The person who believes in causality has nothing to prove, because his way of thinking is the most obvious one, the one with all the evidence already. That's empirical. The believer in "acausality" has everything to prove, because nobody has a single case of what he's claiming exists, and his idea is counterintuitive, non-evidentiary and plausibly fictive.

But you know that, if you know what "burden of proof" means. And I won't insult you by assuming you don't.
Your answer has nothing to do with why the burden of proof for logical possibility would have something to do with what's actually instantiated.

Your answer would need to talk about what logical possibility has to do with what's instantiated.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Immanuel Can »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 3:56 pmYour answer has nothing to do with why the burden of proof for logical possibility would have something to do with what's actually instantiated.
"Burden of proof" and "logical possibility" are two different issues. (Do I actually have to explain this? :shock: )

"Burden of proof" means, "Who has the obligation to show that something is the case?"

"Logical possibility" means "Does this concept inherently make rational sense."

Both are (distinctly) applicable to this question.

"Acausal event" fails both of them. It meets none of the burden of proof required for us to believe in its empirical reality. It also is not a coherent concept, and could not exist in any possible world, and cannot be made rational in relation to Physicalists presuppositions.

When you ignore the former, the latter is still true. When you ignore the latter, you still haven't met the burden of the former.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Terrapin Station »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 4:34 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 3:56 pmYour answer has nothing to do with why the burden of proof for logical possibility would have something to do with what's actually instantiated.
"Burden of proof" and "logical possibility" are two different issues. (Do I actually have to explain this? :shock: )
You were talking about the burden of proof of logical possibility, right?
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Terrapin Station »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 4:34 pm
"Logical possibility" means "Does this concept inherently make rational sense."
By the way, what is something inherently making sense? How would you say that's determined?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Immanuel Can »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 4:51 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 4:34 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 3:56 pmYour answer has nothing to do with why the burden of proof for logical possibility would have something to do with what's actually instantiated.
"Burden of proof" and "logical possibility" are two different issues. (Do I actually have to explain this? :shock: )
You were talking about the burden of proof of logical possibility, right?
No.

Burden of proof and logical possibility and rational consistency. Three critiques not one, each of which I think are important for anybody who advances a concept like "acausal events." In order, they are: who has something to prove, what makes logical/linguistic sense, and what is consistent with the ontological suppositions of the speaker.

Three problems.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Immanuel Can »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 5:27 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 4:34 pm
"Logical possibility" means "Does this concept inherently make rational sense."
By the way, what is something inherently making sense? How would you say that's determined?
When two words in an expression like "acausal event" contradict one another then the expression being employed is a self-contradiction. It also means it's not possible in any "world" at all.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Terrapin Station »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 5:41 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 5:27 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 4:34 pm
"Logical possibility" means "Does this concept inherently make rational sense."
By the way, what is something inherently making sense? How would you say that's determined?
When two words in an expression like "acausal event" contradict one another then the expression being employed is a self-contradiction. It also means it's not possible in any "world" at all.
Ah, so you're claiming a contradiction. Not that the particular word matters--it's not like what I'm talking about is any different whether we call it an "event" or not, but what definition of "event" are you using?

Here are some common definitions of "event" (in the relevant sense):

"a thing that happens"
"something that happens or is regarded as happening; an occurrence"
"anything that happens"

And here's a more specialized physics definition that applies, too:

"the fundamental entity of observed physical reality represented by a point designated by three coordinates of place and one of time in the space-time continuum postulated by the theory of relativity"

So where are you seeing a contradiction with "acausal"? None of those definitions say anything about causes being necessary. What definition are you insisting on that says a cause is necessary and that you're saying must be the pertinent definition rather than the definitions above?
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Terrapin Station »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 5:39 pm No.
Well, that's weird then, because that was the topic--whether something is logically possible or not, and you were soliciting proof for a claim that something is logically possible.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Immanuel Can »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 5:54 pm So where are you seeing a contradiction with "acausal"?
With Physicalism. An "event" is a phenomenon in the physical realm, because Physicalists by definition believe in nothing else. But "acausal" means "non-physical" as well. So it renders the characterization of the "event" an oxymoron: a "physical thing with no physicality," so to speak.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Immanuel Can »

Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 5:56 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 5:39 pm No.
Well, that's weird then, because that was the topic--whether something is logically possible or not
Well, that's what you wanted to narrow it down to, perhaps. But I had three critiques, not merely one. It doesn't help your case that logical impossibility is only one of the problems with "acausal events."
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Free Will and Determinism Necessitate Eachother

Post by Terrapin Station »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 6:40 pm But "acausal" means "non-physical" as well.
Source?
Post Reply