|
|
|
|
|
|
by tpetrina
2586 days ago
|
|
|
Suicide is not the answer to the problem - you need to exist and not decide, not deliberate and not think...or you do accept that some thoughts cannot be _prethought_ by you and they come to you for you to control. So why control _those_ thoughts?
Why deliberate in _that particular way_? |
|
|
It is the answer to the problem as stated. Of course, if you move the goalposts to require two properties that are logically inconsistent, then sure, no conception of free will would qualify. I'm not sure why I should find that compelling.
Finally, your focus on "control" is telling of particular assumptions that free will must have certain properties (a connotative definition). Consider whether you are simply mistaken that these properties are necessary.
As I said, there is a clear distinction between the behaviour of people and inanimate matter. There is a lot of latitude there for a process that we would recognize as free will.