As someone who’s slightly center-right, a significant number of my opinions are unpopular on this platform. But setting politics and social issues aside, I’d say the nuclear bomb of my unpopular opinions is my belief in determinism - and, by extension, my claim that free will is an illusion.
By that, I mean the idea that you could have done otherwise in a given situation is false. If we had a time machine and could replay a moment exactly as it was, you’d make the same choice every single time. Whatever caused you to make that decision the first time would cause you to do it again - without exception.
A related belief of mine is that the sense of self is also an illusion. To me, these are two sides of the same coin. By “self,” I mean the feeling that there’s a subject behind your face, looking out at the world. But that’s just brain chemistry. There’s no point in the brain where it all comes together - no central “you” making decisions. That’s why there’s no free will either - because there’s nothing making the decisions. They’re simply being made.
The illusion comes from the fact of consciousness. The fact of subjective experience. It feels like something to be you, from the inside. There’s qualia to your existence.
I’m sorry to say, but I find that thinking really scary!
Can’t it be used as an excuse everything? It wasn’t me it was everything that others did before. Oh, and there’s no me. There’s no you either! So don’t say that I hurt you, as that’s impossible!
Well, it does remove the justification for blame - there’s no one to blame - but it doesn’t excuse bad behavior. If someone hits another person and says, “I couldn’t help myself, I have no free will,” then while that statement may be factually correct, it still signals how they’re likely to behave in the future. So jailing them is reasonable - not as punishment, but to protect others.
It’s similar to when a bear wanders into a residential area and attacks someone. We don’t shoot the bear because we think it’s evil - it’s just a bear. We do it to protect innocent people.
Laws do work as a deterrent. Knowing that actions have consequences affects how people behave. Retroactively, you could argue it’s not fair to jail someone who couldn’t have acted differently, but if people catch on that there are no real consequences - that we’re just bluffing - then more people will start breaking those laws. That’s why we need to follow through with those “threats,” even if, philosophically, it doesn’t fully make sense.
As someone who’s slightly center-right, a significant number of my opinions are unpopular on this platform. But setting politics and social issues aside, I’d say the nuclear bomb of my unpopular opinions is my belief in determinism - and, by extension, my claim that free will is an illusion.
By that, I mean the idea that you could have done otherwise in a given situation is false. If we had a time machine and could replay a moment exactly as it was, you’d make the same choice every single time. Whatever caused you to make that decision the first time would cause you to do it again - without exception.
A related belief of mine is that the sense of self is also an illusion. To me, these are two sides of the same coin. By “self,” I mean the feeling that there’s a subject behind your face, looking out at the world. But that’s just brain chemistry. There’s no point in the brain where it all comes together - no central “you” making decisions. That’s why there’s no free will either - because there’s nothing making the decisions. They’re simply being made.
The illusion comes from the fact of consciousness. The fact of subjective experience. It feels like something to be you, from the inside. There’s qualia to your existence.
I’m sorry to say, but I find that thinking really scary!
Can’t it be used as an excuse everything? It wasn’t me it was everything that others did before. Oh, and there’s no me. There’s no you either! So don’t say that I hurt you, as that’s impossible!
Well, it does remove the justification for blame - there’s no one to blame - but it doesn’t excuse bad behavior. If someone hits another person and says, “I couldn’t help myself, I have no free will,” then while that statement may be factually correct, it still signals how they’re likely to behave in the future. So jailing them is reasonable - not as punishment, but to protect others.
It’s similar to when a bear wanders into a residential area and attacks someone. We don’t shoot the bear because we think it’s evil - it’s just a bear. We do it to protect innocent people.
Laws do work as a deterrent. Knowing that actions have consequences affects how people behave. Retroactively, you could argue it’s not fair to jail someone who couldn’t have acted differently, but if people catch on that there are no real consequences - that we’re just bluffing - then more people will start breaking those laws. That’s why we need to follow through with those “threats,” even if, philosophically, it doesn’t fully make sense.
How? People are automatons programmed by laws? How are the laws made?
If you know that driving over a certain speed limit will increase your chance of getting a ticket, then you’re less likely to do so.