Re: A defence of determinism

Lance wrote:
Peter H.M. Brooks wrote:
Lance wrote:
Peter H.M. Brooks wrote:

I have the same kind of reaction to determinism. It seems to me to be
in conflict with experience in much the same way as Zeno's arguments
are. Hence I feel certain there is something wrong with it. I can't
understand why you guys are so willing to set aside your experience of
life as a moral decision making being and agree that all of that is
just a charade - and to do so on the basis of an unprovable
metaphysical doctrine to boot!
>
It isn't 'just a charade', as you put it. As you say, it appears perfectly real to us - just as our illusion of a constant visual field is perfectly real to us. Knowing it is an illusion doesn't make it a 'charade' at all, the two are quite separate matters.

In another vein, perhaps you will note my implied point that
metaphysical questions of causality are closely related, indeed
dependent on, metaphysical accounts of the nature of time and space and
matter.

Yes, I did note that point.
.