Smug? Moi?

[lil_shepherd]

Today, In Our Time (which for non-Radio 4 listeners is a programme in which three experts discuss an important scientific/cultural/philosophic/artistic/you-get-the-picture idea, moderated by Melwyn Bragg, acting as 'intelligent and educated layman') was, for their 500th edition, discussing the concept of 'free will' (and, of necessity, Determinism

Comments

[alitalf]

At our present level of knowledge and understanding, if there is such a thing as free will it would seem to be due to quantum effects.

[lil_shepherd]

According to one of the philosophers this morning there is some evidence that this can be discounted. Don't ask me what it is, or who did the work, but thass is wot 'e said.

[madfilkentist]

People act knowing that they have free will as far as their own actions are concerned, because the opposite assumption buries them in paradoxes. But when explaining others, the rejection of the premise of free will does appear and has serious consequences, principally the removal of moral responsibility. That is, we act "as if we had free will," but not necessarily "as if others have free will." This isn't exactly solipsism, but has some features in common with it. We have to act as if we are conscious, but can assume, without a direct contradiction, that everyone else is a robot.

If free will exists, then it must have evolved. Where else would it have come from?

[lil_shepherd]

The comment from Peter Strawson was a side effect of his take on morality. I only skimmed a couple of articles on it, but what he seemed to be saying is that morality only exists in the interactions between people. Agency is assumed within those interactions. In effect, this is what actually happens in normal dealing between people.