That’s what it is to be a compatibilist. They are determinists who believe that there is still a meaningful use of the phrase free will, despite the apparent determinism of the universe. They would redefine free will to not mean I have the ability to supervene on the natural laws, but that when you make a decision absent certain forces compelling a particular choice, that’s what we mean by free will.
For people arguing they have free will, they typically mean they have the ability to do other than what they did do. That is, whenever they make a choice, they do so under the belief that they could have, in principle, made a different choice. As far as science is concerned, such a free will does not exist, because the behaviors you exhibit appear to be completely explainable in terms of the environment impressing upon you, and the effects that impression has on your neural activity. There is no “you” making free decisions in this picture. There’s just stuff bumping into other stuff, and how is that free?
Regarding a general consensus of free will, that’s just not even an argument anyone should care about. Plenty of people are flatly told they have free will because, “they don’t have a choice, God made them with free will”. Others/most are simply uneducated or under-read on the subject. That’s fine, but it doesn’t mean their opinion should weigh on our conclusions. If you show most people an optical illusion and ask them if it appears to be moving, they’d say yes, even though science will tell you there’s nothing moving.
I personally am a hard deterministic regarding free will. I think we have a will but nothing about it is free. It is subject to natural laws just as a rock rolling down a cliff. That’s fine. There’s a related philosophical position of compatibilism, which believes that we have a determined will, but that the truth of the determination does not undercut our ability to talk as if and use the phrase free will as if we really do have such a thing. In this sense, compatibilists would say we don’t have the ability to do other than what we are determined to do, but since we might not yet know what we are determined to do, then that ignorance captures what is meant by free will. So compatibilists are determinists, they just think free will as a concept is compatible with that determinism.
I just disabled ghostery ad-block and that seems to work. Still have ublock going.
Would those numbers you’re citing be coming from the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry? Are you literally taking the word of terrorists to try to make your point?
They wouldn’t condemn Hamas or the Oct 7th attacks, however.
Palestinian defense force scrambling to find new ways to blame Israel anyways
From the article:
The Hamas-run Health Ministry in the Gaza Strip says at least 500 people have been killed in an explosion that it says was caused by an Israeli airstrike
You’re using Hamas as a source. That’s pretty embarrassing.
Thank you for saying that.
You do realize Hamas is responsible for their own actions? It doesn’t matter what Israel did, Israel can have peace with Palestinians at least in principle. With Hamas, there can be no peace. Quit justifying terrorism as being caused by actions outside their control. It is completely in their control how they respond and they chose to respond with terrorism. What happens now is justified self-defense.
The absolute irony… You are the one defending killing civilians. That’s what Hamas does and did to Israel. What Israel does after is self-defense, and I don’t really care about playing terrorist peek-a-boo. If you don’t want to die, get out the fucking way so Israel can destroy Hamas. It’s the fastest way for the Palestinian people to have peace.
Did you warn them to get out of the way?
From the article:
The Hamas-run Health Ministry in the Gaza Strip says at least 500 people have been killed in an explosion that it says was caused by an Israeli airstrike.
Who needs journalists when you have Hamas to report for you. That’s apparently acceptable for this community of news.
How do I know Israel did that? Hamas is known for attacking their own citizens and blaming Israel. That’s literally their tactic. What does Israel gain from earning civilians to leave and then attacking them? Meanwhile, Hamas stands to gain a lot if it can convince the Gazans and international community that Israel is bombing civilians.
You destroy the apartment block if that’s what you have to do to destroy Hamas. You can’t save everyone, because if you try, your own children will die. This is war. Innocents will die. If you have cancer in you, you kill the good cells to kill the cancer. The alternative is to let yourself be destroyed. The complete elimination of Hamas is the fastest way to end the killing of innocents on both sides, rather than letting innocents die in drawn out conflict over decades. There doesn’t seem to be a better solution.
No, I love Jewish people too but I support Israel’s right to defend itself. The Palestinian people can’t go free so long as there exists among them organizations that long for the destruction of Israel and all Jews. The quickest path to freedom for Palestine and the fewest loss of innocents is the elimination of Hamas. Sorry, but that’s how this works. If there is cancer in the body, you kill good cells to kill the cancer. You must, or else you yourself will be destroyed. I don’t celebrate the deaths of innocents on either side. But I am at least aware that with Israel, there is the possibility of peace. With Hamas, there can never be.
So Israel is responsible for funding Hamas, but Hamas isn’t responsible for the terrorism they commit? That’s how you assign responsibility?
If I come at you with a knife, do you have the right to defend yourself?
From the article:
The HAMAS-RUN Health Ministry in the Gaza Strip says at least 500 people have been killed in an explosion that it says was caused by an Israeli airstrike.
So you won’t trust Israel but you’ll trust Hamas? Lmao.
Yes, now you’re getting it. One is terrorism, the other is defence from that terrorism. The destruction of Hamas is the fastest way to stop the death of innocents on both sides. Israel could have accomplished this by destroying all of Gaza, but instead they show restraint in trying to minimize civilian casualties, and they will risk the assured death of even more of their own citizens by invading to root out Hamas.
And again, Hamas is completely responsible for their own actions, no matter who they’re taking money from. It’s like saying the U.S. is responsible for war crimes because they’ve given money to Israel. The actors in the scene are responsible for what they do. In the context of the user I was replying to, they clearly stated Israel is supporting Hamas so they can take Gaza for themselves. That’s what I disputed. That’s not criticism, it’s manufactured.
I would call this determinism as much as anything else. Whatever you discover by reflecting on memories, you make your decision based on those memories, ergo there was a reason that determined your choice.
I would just agree that we have a “will”. It’s the “free” qualifier that’s disputed.
Sorry, I can’t agree. We have ignorance about the future, but that doesn’t mean my decisions are undetermined. As far as I can tell, everything is either determined or not determined. If it’s determined, then I was not free to choose it. If it’s not determined, then it’s random, in which case I again could not have freely chosen it. You seem to be moving towards compatibilism, which accepts determinism but believes determinism can still be compatible with a notion of free will, e.g. our ignorance of the future is what we mean by free will.
Personally, I think life is very interesting bring a wet robot! However, I understand why most reject the concept out of hand.