You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–] Nukeisrael 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

You don’t understand Nietzsche it you think that’s what he meant in his works. Humans are no different than any other animal. If I put I stick infront of a line of ants and they all “decide” to move out of the way of the barrier I placed are they still free will gods? Why did whites have 10 kids when we worked on farms and now 1.4 when we are in a post industrial modern society? Why do East Asians have 1.2 kids per family? Is this a choice? No way. You have to put the sticks in front of the ants and lead them. This magical thinking of some sort of god like magical free will is nonsense from the enlightenment. Everything wrong with the west can be traced back to the enlightenment which ironically Darwin under empiricism completely destroyed and later Watson. After we realized it was genes which people already assumed due to selective breeding it was just proven. It’s just so annoying, these people who blame the individual which is again an enlightenment belief only held in the west, that we are failing. A human is literally no different than an ant. It’s just lots of whimsical things go into pretending we are special when we are not. Starting from a meta biological determinist state everything comes together.

[–] Helena73 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

What I mean to say is that humans perhaps “work better”— are happier, more functional, reproductive, cooperative— if they believe they are individual “snowflakes” with free will and a soul. That it may be the poison pill to understand that we are all just machines and that none of us really matter that much on an individual basis. That we are locked into our fates by our genes (and culture, which you always overlook).

The fact is, we have evolved our sense of free will, we have evolved to believe in this illusion, even if it doesn’t exist. Just as we have evolved religion. The belief in free will— that we have choices by which we are judged — is universal. Every society on earth believes people choose to be “good” or “bad”. So if we all have adapted this way of thinking, what does that tell you about its adaptation? Maybe it’s useful.

If we accept that psychopaths cant help breaking all social rules and harming people then we can’t punish them— we will have to let all the George Floyds out of jail, which would not be pleasant.

Free will was not invented in the enlightenment. We all must live under a regime of behavior governed by an illusion of right and wrong. That is how the human brain evolved to work. We all operate under the illusion that we can choose between right and wrong, this is pretty much universal. The concept of an immortal soul and the ability to choose salvation, the science of salvation that kept the church in business for so long, this is all evidence of the belief of free will predating the enlightenment. It’s inherent to human thinking. Its how the software works.

I think you have to at least entertain the idea that more we dismantle this illusion the more chaotic and sick our society becomes.

[–] Nukeisrael 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Truth>functionality. I don’t care about what is functionally better but the truth. This is the same tired old argument people like Keith woods likes to make. “We are spiritual creatures therefore god has to exist and we cannot just be bio robots.” You can build objective morality straight from the ground up from pure philosophical materialism (not economic thats jew shit). Also, East Asians don’t believe in free will and neither did the ancient aryans as seen as Buddhism where everything “is.” They believed everything is always perfect because it is just as it should be which is literal determinism and fate.