Determinism is often cited as an argument against free will. Here is the Wikipedia entry on Determinism and Free Will.
My argument against determinism is simply that it does not exist at the quantum level. If all of the microscopic components of the Universe are built on the basis of Quantum Mechanics, which is probabilistic rather than deterministic, it would be inconsistent to say that the macroscopic world - those parts that are visible - are deterministic.
Wikipedia reports that Stephen Hawkings explains that the regularity of statistics allows the deterministic workings of Newtonian mechanics to hold in spite of quantum indeterminacy. This variety of determinism is called "Adequate Determinism." (It is true that Newtonian mechanics is valid at the macro-level. However, our thought takes place at the quantum level.)
Wikipedia notes that the philosopher J. J. M. Smart believes that indeterminacy does not imply free will. He equates indeterminacy with randomness. If our acts are random, he suggests that would not support a case for free will.
I wonder how one can be a scientist or a philosopher, with hopes of creating new and imaginative orderings of what is found and somehow interpret one's own inventions as automatic output.
From whence effort? Can we not stir ourselves up to passion... or calm ourselves down?
Are we powerless against the tide?
What do you think?
My argument against determinism is simply that it does not exist at the quantum level. If all of the microscopic components of the Universe are built on the basis of Quantum Mechanics, which is probabilistic rather than deterministic, it would be inconsistent to say that the macroscopic world - those parts that are visible - are deterministic.
Wikipedia reports that Stephen Hawkings explains that the regularity of statistics allows the deterministic workings of Newtonian mechanics to hold in spite of quantum indeterminacy. This variety of determinism is called "Adequate Determinism." (It is true that Newtonian mechanics is valid at the macro-level. However, our thought takes place at the quantum level.)
Wikipedia notes that the philosopher J. J. M. Smart believes that indeterminacy does not imply free will. He equates indeterminacy with randomness. If our acts are random, he suggests that would not support a case for free will.
I wonder how one can be a scientist or a philosopher, with hopes of creating new and imaginative orderings of what is found and somehow interpret one's own inventions as automatic output.
From whence effort? Can we not stir ourselves up to passion... or calm ourselves down?
Are we powerless against the tide?
What do you think?
RSS Feed