Re: A Revolution in Thought: Part Two
What I saw was proof by self referencing definition with an illicit "must" thrown in, tautological yes. True? Not so sure, me, because I don't know how greater satisfaction is determined. After the fact, before the fact? Also I think "what we did" is actually true, but not necessarily true (thank you davidm for the link to Swartz which laid that out clearly)
As I have stated, I think our "will" is constrained by our own unique neural makeup...the pathways our experiences and cognitive processes have created that makes us who we are and do what we do.
We can't make decisions against the decision our brain makes (tautology, I know) however we can feed the brain and add information- by thinking about something, reading something, discussing with others- which allows decisions to be changed right down to the time they are acted upon.
Is that some kind of determinism? I don't know. Does it matter to me whether this can be defined as free will or determinism? Pragmatically speaking, not a single bit.
|