Compatibilism

So then, it would be predetermined that I think that Hope Estheim is best husbando, but not which exact image I would download for this thread, that I have free will to decide which.

So Determinism is likely false.
The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics implies things are genuinely random in the universe.
>but muh Bohmian mechanics and muh many world's interpretation
Bell's theorem shows that any deterministic theory that produces the same result as the QM necessitates that the hidden variables be nonlocal.
What this means is that causality would travel faster than light for these hidden variables.
This means either you could go back in time, and kill your grandfather etc.
Or it means that time doesn't actually exist in the first place, and the statistical physicists are right that time is merely an emergent property of entropy.
The former case is unlikely, because of the logical paradoxes associated with time travel. The latter case is more likely, but in this sense it no longer makes sense to think about causality at all, since your future self "causes" your present self.

>>2728270
i think free will is real in the way we feel as if we have a free will while determinism is also true because the human is a physical thing that cannot defy the principle of cause and consequence.
we feel like having a free will because we witness our own thought process (which is the actual "you"), while we are like a clockwork with molecule-sized gears

>>2728270
>One argument is that way the final outcome is predetermined, the pathway is not, and that is free will.
That's not compatibilism, that's fatalism.

>>2728270

I think it's a shit idea. Some people are compelled to always offer up a compromise as the solution when in reality there are right and wrong answers and mixing a right answer with a wrong answer just gets you another wrong answer.

>>2729892

>Or it means that time doesn't actually exist in the first place, and the statistical physicists are right that time is merely an emergent property of entropy.
>it no longer makes sense to think about causality at all

That's right. The time paradoxes go away when you stop expecting causality and start looking at the events that span across space-time as just like objects stretched out next to one another in regular space. Going back and altering / removing an event in the past direction wouldn't make all the stuff in the future direction stop existing any more than removing a rock in regular space would make all the rocks positioned to the right of it disappear. What we see as causality (A makes B happen) is instead more like patterns on a quilt. The end part of a quilt pattern will keep on showing up after the beginning part not because the beginning part "caused" the end part but instead just because it's a pattern.

>>2728270
I wanna fucc that boipucci

>>2728270

its all a misconception, will is ''free'', the individual and his actions and behaviors are under will, will is the determinant

File: 4db.png (60KB, 860x650px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 860x650px

>>2731576

>will is "free"

>>2731576
free from what, though? the principle of cause and consequence?