I rediscovered Gregg Caruso recently and habe been binging his videos. I think i agree with his philosophical veiws on free will more than just about anyone. I do think he may be a little naive about the effects that letting go of certain attitudes might have initially on society. For example people behaving well because they want to feel like they are a "good person" (ie moral pride in oneself/ fear of public shame). Thats not a reason not to move forward with foraging a better path though. But it may cause things to decline for a bit while we work out the kinks...and we should go into the project with open eyes.

Holding people accountable is a mechanism of evolution. It is in the process of making things more efficient/better.

Excellent watch

In the statement "I have free will", each of the 4 words needs to be unpacked and isn't what it appears to be.

@noahhubscher2926

4 жыл бұрын

J P S gold👌🏼

If the universe is deterministic then it follows that, because we do not have the Freewill to construct morality, rather, morality is a phenomena that is produced by the cosmos itself. Morality is neither objective or subjective; it is something else entirely. It is just something that happens. We don't have any choice but to be moral or immoral. Whatever happens is fixed, predetermined.

You had me at free will:-)

I agree with Caruso's view that prevention should be the focus and not retribution or problem solving. I think this should be applied to society in order to minimize incarceration instead of applying it only to inmates. Applying it to inmates (so they don't keep returning to lockup) is important now but so is minimizing the cause they're there in the first place. We have to do both at this stage. There will always be a small percentage that should be segregated. Representationalism says the picture formed by our thoughts is based on reality but isn't quite real itself, it can be subject to distortion. Physical actions can lead to some of these distortions, actions like breathing CO, ingesting sugar, eating certain proteins that influence dopamine levels, etc. No one is forcing us to ingest these things and that is where free will comes in. We create the society we have by our actions that are done by our own free will. The hard part in seeing this on an individual level, is that we don't have a reference point to the picture created in our heads, unless we do the work and compare, and maybe do it several times back and forth. Sometimes the effect can be quite dramatic as in giving up smoking but in terms of diet and exercise the effect happens over quite a long time span. Perhaps having a captive group of test subjects is the perfect opportunity to demonstrate how diet and exercise combined with education can raise the bar and lead to a better perspective. This would be problem prevention instead of problem solving, if applied to society. The profit motive might get lost in the shuffle though.

As you said ''guilt presupposed that one beleive he may have choose otherwise''. In fact children are constantly told by their parents that they could have acted differently and the children feeling guilt in such cases is integral for children gradually become responsible adults. This is buil-in in our parental education, in our religions, in our judicial traditions, into all our litteratures, etc... The scientific free will deniers are simply going against the whole human traditions without any alternative safety net on their part explaining to us, OK if we go along with you and deny Free Will then WHAT? How do we proceed if we deny we have free will? How do we educated our kids in a way consistent with NO FREE WILL. How do we makes laws and punish people without free will? On what basis? Should we do a folk psychology study of ''Free Will Deniers'' and see if they live according to their belief? Do they act as Free Will Deniers? I do not believe any free will deniers can act in a consistent way with the so-called belief.

It seems that mindfulness can be used to give us some agency to self-correct which could be considered a type of free will...but the environmental factors that determine whether or not we discover or are introduced to the practice and the thoughts/emotions that convince us it is a worthwile endevor or that make us naturally mindful (ie self aware) individuals are not in our control. So in a way we may exercise free will in transcendent moments where we rise above our nature, but aside from that there is no free will. And whether or not we have those transcendent moments is not in a person's control. So...retributive punishment would still not be justified.

25:12 I'm going with the "problamatic" solution. It helps me make sense of these problems: 1) The Transdentals (truth,goodness,beauty) and how they all seem true but are yet very hard to reason about. Math is more discovered than invented. 2) The dozen or so dimensionless numbers floating around. (the mutliverse idea is the exact opposite of parsimonious).The universe is intelligible and doesn't have to be; actually should not be. 3) How paramecium seem to have at least little bit of consciousness yet have no neurons. (Watch videos of them seeming to panic as the escape amoeba.) 4) How inanimate matter became animate. Galen Strawson said he thought "evolution 'found' consciousness". Would make more sense to say "consciousness found evolution". I think Freeman Dyson is right an there is a sort of "universe mind". PanENtheism.

@salviatoast5147

5 жыл бұрын

The Universe is intelligible but it doesn't have to be ?

Great talk. But why is Jerry Seinfeld doing it? lol-the more i listen, the more I see and hear JS. However, my distraction notwithstanding- cleared a few definitions up for me.

God decides that whatever happens is only for good (psalm 234; 43)

@pardoharsimanjuntak1483

5 жыл бұрын

God is responsible for all His decisions, and humans must have firm faith. Because God does not want to be called a cheap God, so does His creation.

Ugh, why do people when talking about compatibilists say they are redefining the meaning of "free wil"?. That is as meaningful as saying when doctors have a dispute on how to cure a patient they are engaged in a dispute of what the meaning of the word "cure" is or that all arguments in epistemology are over what the meaning o the word "knowledge" is. Is there some famous person that is the cause of this sound bite?

@joemalik575

5 жыл бұрын

Because we are products of our environment and our genetics. Which none of us choose.

@shannon8111

5 жыл бұрын

@@joemalik575 would one need to choose there environment and genetics to have free will? That just seems strange to me.

@shannon8111

5 жыл бұрын

Further to this if we are rational animals with free will it would make sense to consider experience (the environment) in our choices. I am not saying free will exists I am undecided.

@MidiwaveProductions

5 жыл бұрын

Shannon The freedom of will = The freedom to make decisions based on reason, logic and ethics; or nature, nurture and culture.

The longer this went on the less convincing the guest became. But do not hold him responsible, it was predetermined.

I sense that he's reasoning backwards. Trying to put a philosphical veneer onto his social justice motiviated poltical views. Justice doesn't need a modifier.

I'm pretty sure this guy hasn't really thought deeply about the subject.

@Oners82

5 жыл бұрын

Frank Feldman Yeah, I'm sure you as the random KZreadr have thought about it far more deeply than the professional philosopher, LOL!!!