If you don't believe you have the power of self-determination, you live a cucked life.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
If you don't believe you have the power of self-determination, you live a cucked life.
"you are not free to want what you want." - cucked
>N-no, I totally have free will. My actions and desires aren't determined by pre-existing causes - cuckold
>Everything is predetermined! Guess it can't be helped that I'm going to spend another day jacking off to porn for 10 hours. - giga onions cuck
>I wasn't sexually abused as a child, I actually choose to be a flaming homosexual with my free will - cucklet
>I was sexually abused, so as a consequence, I am now a flaming homosexual! - predetermined cuck
>Each and every thing in this universe has a cause...except my actions - IQlet brainlet cuckold virgin troony incel söylent dicklet chinlet malding Black personhomosexual
>Everything in this universe has a cause. Deviation cannot exist - npc cuck
>Deviations have no pre-existing cause - terminal brainlet cuckold weeaboo troon
>Everything has a cause! Now I can understand everything, including the intended meaning of the new game by Toyota Subaru! - eternal autist cuck
>I have self-determination like all of my favorite anime protagonists - malding balding megamind slaphead cuckhold estrogen pill ingesting pedophile troon
>My actions are predetermined because everything has a cause! Just like the transgender investigator on Netflix's new hit show told me!!! - submissive domesticated medicated autistic analyzer npc cucklord
>I have free will because... it feels like I have it - cuckold prime
>I don't have free will because nobody told me I have it... - cuck
> I have free will because I want to have it - bull
>I have free will because IQfy told me it was based - omega cuck maximus
>IQfy said it was based, so I must hold a contrary opinion to stand out! Maybe I'll also tattoo my opinions on my forehead! - reactive mentally ill cuck
>Free will is heckin based, trad and redpilled ... what do you mean the concept of free will was invented from judeo-christcuck schizos? - mega giga homie cuckold supreme
>I must have free will so I can freely consoom the next ntr porn okay. It it doesn't mean I'm a cuck - goofy ahh coomer
this
kek'd and this
>NOOOO JEROME HAS THE BIOLOGICAL URGE TO FRICK MY MOTHER HE IS A SLAVE TO HIS SENSES
that's not the same as lacking free will moron
Why, thanks for the advice, anime girl. I'll be sure to remember that.
Lot of people hated monster but i thought it was okay. Too much filler tho and kinda a weird story for a anime
I hated the anime, but blazed through the manga in like an afternoon
Ironically, people who believe in free will are more vulnerable to cuckoldry, since they naively believe their significant other will always stay loyal out of their own free will, whereas determinist chads understand people are products of their environment, and so they mold their environments in such a way as to ensure that loyalty. Also, every significant alpha male in history entertained some notion of predetermination, from Alexander to Napoleon. You know who believes in free will? Christcucks.
Why do IQfycels and /misc/cels turn everything into a false dichotomy?
Because they don't read.
It's not a false dichotomy. Not just emperors, but also philosophers and scientists, the intellectual sigmas, posit and subscribe and to determinism/fate. It's the down on their luck, gutter fodder subhumans who delude themselves with the belief in self-determinism
>All of my past poor performances are not indications of future poor performance, I can totally turn myself around!
>I may have no material possessions, but at least I own my actions
Complete copes
Most philosophers think that free will is compatible with determinism, though. Determinism and fate are also not the same thing.
Compatibilism is determinism in denial.
No? Compatibilists think determinism is real.
They think it doesn't count as determinism when it concerns their own actions because...reasons.
No, compatibilists think all of our actions are determined.
Because it's determinism afraid to acknowledge itself as such.
Compatibilists acknowledge that determinism is true, like I just said. They just don't think that there is a contradiction between determinism and free will or moral responsibility.
Because they redefine free will to mean "internal brain mechanics" or whatever cope they've devised in the face of reality.
Can you cite a compatibilist philosopher who defines free will in that way?
No. You are free to cherrypick the one compatibilist philosopher that defines free will conveniently for this argument.
Christcucks do not believe in free will. They believe in the cause and effect laid out by their religion. Determinist "chads" are doomed to repeat their own history.
We have Volition, we have the power of Will.
We have the choice to decide a goal then pursuing it. Doing so, we bend our reality so to fulfill our desires.
But we, ourselves, are part of reality, we are the product of our environment and not separate from it. We feed on it, we integrate it both in body and mind. Yet we do not stop being us.
It's by changing our world by manifesting our will that we prove ourselves as our own actors.
I agree that we have volition and that we are part of reality.
I'll believe that all of these intellectual sigmas (kek) are just products of their environment, but I have free will 🙂
Reminder
Non-determinism is moronic
Compatibilism is cope
Hard determinism is reality
If you believe something just because you want to believe it, you are coping. I dont care if you come up with reasons after the fact, you are still disgust me. You are even worse than the non-determinists because atleast they still have the potential to stare reality in the eye if they ever stop being moronic
>Cause and effect dictates that every event must occur after another, so every belief must be cope! I will be an eternally cucked copycat!
The concept of free will was invented by people I don't like, so I better pick a different concept made by people I do like. Also, I hecking hate people who say the N word!!! - cucked IQfy poster
Thank god for the circumstances I'm in. If anything changes I might just become transgender! - predetermined cuck
>You can't judge concepts by their author because ... you just can't, okay!?!? - corny ass cuck ass free will believing ass sexless dripless morbless ass b***h Black person
Oops, I shit my pants again while studying the ideas of a historical figure I like. At least it's not for nothing. I'll be able to imitate their behaviour slightly better in my roleplay server! - history cuck
what difference does it make whether we have free will or not
Its the foundation of a huge amount of beliefs, especially in morality. When people generally talk about things, they are assuming that free will exists and are generally going to reject any ideas that assume free will doesnt exist. Whether someone believes in free will or not will determine what ideas they will be open to, its very important
>they are assuming that free will exists
why do you believe this?
Because even amongst philosophers, only around 10% actually believe free will doesnt exist, its the status quo to believe that some kind of free will exists. If someone is religious (which is the majority of the world), they are basically garuanteed to believe god gave them free will
And how do philosophers define free will?
Compatiblists (people who believe in determinism and free will) which represent around 40% of the philosophers in the survey define it as "if you are following your desires without coercion, you are following your free will". Non-determinists which represent 40-50% do not even believe in cause and effect so everything should be free including our will
>following your desires
that's determinism
Yes they are compatibilists, they believe in both free will and determinism
Except you just described determinism and called it free will.
Dont shoot the messenger, i think its moronic too
That is not how any philosopher defines determinism.
It's deterministic.
Yeah. That's the whole point.
So then why are you posting if you agree?
How many times do people have to explain it to you for you to comprehend what compatibilism is?
You still haven't provided your own definition for free will under a compatibilist framework, most likely because I was right when I said Compatibilists redefine free will something like 'internal brain mechanics', despite that being absolutely deterministic if you give it any amount of thought.
Dumbass
just explained to you a simple compatibilist account of free will.
>Dumbass
You literally admitted earlier that you have not read anything on the subject.
Right, and that implicitly redefines free will as "following your desires", which you agreed is actually deterministic, proving once and for all that it is essentially determinism in denial. It the same thing as saying god exists because by definition god must exist. It's semantics.
>that implicitly redefines free will as "following your desires", which you agreed is actually deterministic, proving once and for all that it is essentially determinism in denial
Dude, the whole point of compatibilism is that it affirms that determinism and free will can exist at the same time. This has been explained to you a dozen times and you just can't get it through your head.
>It the same thing as saying god exists because by definition god must exist. It's semantics.
It's not "semantics," because the compatibilist will hold that their account of free will is the one that best captures our intuitions about freedom and moral responsibility, and they'll say that libertarians and hard determinists are the ones who are redefining free will. This is very plausible in fact because there have been studies on this, and most people aren't intuitively incompatibilists.
Compatibilism is hard determinism in denial.
>dude, compatibilism appeals to my intuitions, y'know?
That's even worse. It's like saying god exists because of some schizo's spiritual experiences. A total nonargument.
You are clearly engaging in bad faith.
How am I supposed to respond to what is essentially:
>It's free will because "most people" feel like it's free will.
It is a complete argumentum ad populum. There is nothing to address. You're the bad faith actor.
what would fundamentally change if we accepted that free will does not exist? would we suddenly stop punishing criminals?
I believe the justice system will continue but it will focus more on fixing people like Norway does rather than just punishing them like most countries
It depends. If you are a retributivist, then you would have to conclude that punishment is morally unjustifiable if there is no free will.
Why? Even under a hard determinist framework it could be the case that some people came into existence destined to be punished, in the same way that livestock are raised to be slaughtered or fuel made to be burned. A lot of cultures believed this based on the prevalence of human sacrifice. What makes humanity particularly special or unique in the universe?
>Why?
According to retributivism, the sole purpose of punishment should be to give people what they deserve. If there is no free will, then no one is morally responsible for their actions, and so, no one can deserve rewards or punishments. The only way to justify punishing people would be through consequentialist or other justifications, but retributivists are going to say that those are problematic because they treat people as a means to an end, or because the consequentialist can't explain why it's wrong to punish innocent people if it will have good consequences, or whatever. This is very important, because a lot of people have deontological and retributivist intuitions.
There would be more of an emphasis on rehabilitation and prevention, to stop people from becoming criminals in the first place and to turn what criminals there are into law abiding citizens. Punishment is sometimes framed as rehabilitation, but it does not actually serve to reduce recidivism rates and only appeases the troglodyte masses.
This has been an interesting thread for me. I used the word "self-determining" to describe my belief, but as is the case with most terms, the interpretation differs dramatically depending on the individual. The interpretation that I had in mind was not that you exist as a separate entity making choices in a world. In fact, I don't believe logically consistent separations exist at all. I will believe whatever is most fun to me because I am reality, not just part of it.