I haven't finished this yet but a very important component to this issue is where Tim stands on the issue of the soul. It sounds like he falls into the emergent dualist camp, not the substance dualist camp. On substance dualism the soul is what allows for freewill because it transcends the physical body and is not subject to the physics and chemistry of the physical body.
@TheKstuart
6 жыл бұрын
At 39:40 , the guest gives a list of assumptions that he needs in order to do "philosophy". Yet, there are serious philosophical viewpoints that hold none of those assumptions. Western academic philosophy uses the method of holding a thousand assumptions, and then looking at what happens if you vary one of those assumptions. Eastern philosophy starts with no assumptions, and then examines what is.
@MidiwaveProductions
6 жыл бұрын
TheKstuart. Correct. Modern western academic philosophers are merely puppets under the religion of materialism. So many opinions, so little wisdom. Parmenides is rolling in his "grave" ;)
@adamsasso1
5 жыл бұрын
We are not even close to aware of why we do most of what we do. We THINK we know why we do what we do. But, we wind up only making justifications after the fact (sometimes very soon after). Just go watch one of Derron Brown’s videos.
@MikeJones-xl3ti
5 жыл бұрын
Haven’t finished yet but seems he’s confusing free will with reason-responsiveness. Something we do have, but it’s not free will.
@alastairpaisley6668
6 жыл бұрын
The free will debate is generally framed in terms of determinism and indeterminism. However, I think there is another way of framing it, namely, in terms of two different types of causes - mechanistic causes (or efficient causes) and teleological causes (or final causes). So, the issue is not so much as whether we have free will as it is whether there are final causes at play in the world. I say there are.
@modvs1
6 жыл бұрын
I've never understood why a cosmological explanation (scientific,religious/theological or otherwise) is required by anyone. Apart from talking and writing (representation), there isn't a single, ecologically productive interactivity obtaining between any agent and the 'things'' that populate the immediate environment, that is contingent upon being cognizant about how the universe began or will transpire. Do we seriously think, at some point in the not too distant future, that the ambit of human agency will also reign over the beginning (and the ending) of the universe?
@mrssrm5053
6 жыл бұрын
Indiscriminate placement of ads? Really! ! Really!! In a discussion like this they are more than annoying.
@MikeJones-xl3ti
5 жыл бұрын
You pay nothing to watch this. The ‘price’ is ads. If you don’t want ads, pay for your content. Much love.
@danielaiello6461
6 жыл бұрын
His base assumption: "I feel like I have free choice, lets assume that is correct and move from there", just requires a cursory reading of the perceptual illusions encountered by the gestalt psychologists of the early 20th century to not take seriously. I agree with him that determinism as produced by a causal chain of effects has much to be contended with - what we know about quantum mechanics, top --> down regulation, Hume's model of causality, panpsychism etc., however, his jump into theism just sort of lost me... I'd be open to read more about this guy, and any good arguments for libertarian free will in general, but his line of reasoning strikes me as a little salvatory to his already held assumptions...
@frankfeldman6657
6 жыл бұрын
these are religious assertions, completely unsupported and unsupportable. i'm surprised wright dignifies this guy w a podcast.
Пікірлер: 11