An atheist can't believe in free will
This topic contains 54 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by 
-
There is a common concern that without free will there’s no accountability. Nonsense. We will go on holding people to account because we have to, in the sense that this is how we respond to acts that displease or enrage us. We respond in this way because we have to. Literally. We have no real choice but respond that way.
That’s such a cop out. By that logic…you believe there is no such thing as free will…because you have to. Everything is “because you have to”. Everything. I have no reason to take anything you say seriously because “you have to”. I, of course, have no alternative, than to not have taken you seriously, because I had no choice. Make up your mind Unseen. Is all sense of freedom, choice, responsibility, fairness, entitlement etc an illusion or not? I have never, ever, ever heard a convincing argument explaining how one can be meaningful (not an illusion) and the others cannot. Wanting there to be such a thing as fairness or responsibility isn’t a reason to suddenly start believing in free will. You should simply stand by the statements you make, and all accompanying statements that should follow (to its logical conclusion).
If you wanna act as though responsibility is a semi-meaningful concept, a descriptor of phenomena, as though it is something real or worse taking seriously, then you have to do the same with things like choice/free-will. Make up your mind.
You are simply, using a really bad cop out, to have your cake and eat it too. If we can reduce a concept such as choice, to meaningless, because we live in an unavoidably mechanical world, determined solely by the events before it, negating agency/freedom/choice, then EVERYTHING is. Actions happen SOLELY because they must. If you talk about responsibility as though it is meaningful, so should you about free will.
If we don’t have free will, we are not responsible for our actions nor does it make sense, within the same argument, to then try to influence others.
If we DO have free will, then we are (at least to some extent) responsible for our actions and it makes sense, in the same argument to influence people’s choices.
“If God doesn’t exist to punish sinners after death, then people can sin and get away with it” is a kind of off-the-cuff summary of Kant’s reason for believing in God. Note that it’s not a proof. It doesn’t necessitate the existince of God but rather argues that we’re in a sorry state if He doesn’t exist.
Your argument for free will similarly argues that if there’s no free will, we’re in a sorry state and, like Kant’s argument, it’s more a lament than a proof. Frankly, it’s not even an indication that free will might exist.
We are responsible for what we do to the extent that we intend to do them. We don’t need to say “Joe had free will when he stabbed Bill,” to hold him to account. It’s enough to determine that Joe was conscious of what he was doing and the likely consequence(s) of his action to determine that Joe is not someone we want walking the streets.
How do we escape the rather obvious fact that whatever we do must have a sufficient cause or else it’s a miracle? Unless there’s a third alternative, that pretty much sums up the possibilities, doesn’t it?
I’ve been asking some questions you seem resolute in not answering: What is free will? How does it work? and Does my cat have it? (& if not why not?)
Hard questions, I know. Do you need more time?
-
This reply was modified 1 year ago by
Unseen.
-
This reply was modified 1 year ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.