What difference does it make whether we have free will
or not?
I was wondering about this myself and was hoping someone would satifactorily
explain why the question of freewill is important. Try this:
I sit in my chair and moments later I stand up an leave the room. Now, I
certainly believe I choose to stand up and leave, but if there is no
freewill then we know that my "making a choice" was not really possible.
But the only options to choose from (a true dilema I believe) are that
either (A) I choose to stand up and leave (and freewill exists) or (B) I
just believe that I have chosen to stand up and leave (and there is no
freewill).
So either we have freewill, or we have the illusion of freewill.... So I
ask, even if we "just" have the illusion of freewill, what difference does
it make? We still think we're choosing what to do. Somebody even suggested
that morality isn't possible in world without freewill. But even if
freewill is an illusion we still think we're making choices that are moral
or immoral (so there's no real threat to morality and moral thinking that I
can see). And besides... if there is only "an illusion of freewill", and no
"actual freewill" then why not just call the illusion itself "freewill"???
The consequences to us and our "choices" are the same either way. Right????
it's all good,
Richard
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:38 BST