That's simply not the point some determinists are compelled to note. Being rational or irrational regarding something that we say or do when we were never able to opt freely not to say or do it?Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 9:02 am This idea that people can't be rational if determinism is true, and they can only be rational if indeterminism is true, is worth exploring. I'd explore it with Biggy but I know from experience that he doesn't seem to know how to stay on a topic or answer questions clearly.
No, instead, some argue that while lions, driven by instinct, are not really free in a libertarian sense to hunt and kill wildebeests, human beings "somehow" did acquire autonomy when the brains of lions "somehow" evolved into human brains.
And I know from experience that when others here accuse me of failing to stay on topic or of not answering their questions clearly, that usually means staying on topic as they construe the topic to be or thinking clearly about it as they do.
With others here, they share in the belief that one can stay on topic and think clearly. When the exchanges revolve around conflicting objectivist moral dogmas. With me however I question the possibility of objective morality in a No God world. What's at stake with me is the possibility that the objectivists might begin to tumble down into the same fractured and fragmented hole that "I" am now in. God or No God, there must be an objective morality. Otherwise, how on Earth, from day to day, can we sustain an essentially meaningful and purposeful existence? Let alone carry on for all the rest of eternity...saved!