Re: Varieties of compatibilism 1 (to be continued)

Dave Smith wrote:
Lance wrote:
Varieties of compatibilism............

I was waiting for the next instalment, but it doesn't seem to be
forthcoming....

I think one problem is that compatibilists and incompatibilists
sometimes talk past each other, since the former are discussing
voluntary behaviour and the latter are discussing origination. This
review by Galen Strawson of Dennett's book 'Freedom Evolves' makes the
point:

www.rdg.ac.uk/AcaDepts/ld/Philos/gjs/2003dennett.htm

I also found this interview with Strawson interesting -- maybe because
I largely agree with him. :>)

www.believermag.com/issues/200303/?read=interview_strawson

Thank you for the references - I'll look them up.

I agree. I'm amazed, actually, as to how much energy determinism raises in opposition. To me it seems a non-issue - and even that is seen as provocative (it obviously is, in fact, provocative from our experience in discussion here).

Actually, not really to try to be provocative (it seems that I don't need to try - I was wrong, as an adolescent, to make any effort to be provocative, it seems to come to me as flies to ***), the shock at the implications of determinism and the black and white suggestion that you can't accept determinism without being a nihilist, echo, exactly (and that's what is really strange is the debate is supposed to be between honest atheists) those between theists and atheists on the matter of religion:

If you don't believe in gods then you can't be moral.

If you are a determinist then morality can't exist.

Spot the difference.
.

Quantcast