Instigator / Pro
1500
rating
0
debates
0.0%
won
Topic

Determinism is true

Status
Debating

Waiting for the contender's second argument.

The round will be automatically forfeited in:

00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Art
Time for argument
One week
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One month
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
6,000
Contender / Con
1485
rating
3
debates
16.67%
won
Description
~ 303 / 5,000

I'm doing devil's advocate here. First round is for acknowledging the challenge or whatever. Just leave a few words to start the debate. I will start with offering arguments for determinism in Round 2,3 and so on. I think it's up to my opponent whether to rebut or just offer cases in favor of freewill.

Round 1
Pro
That was quick. I will start my argument first and then you can either rebut or offer your own. I'll begin preparation for round 2 and good luck.
Con
So, its basically a 3 rounder.

Very well.

Since you instigated the debate and are Pro of it, I'll let you begin.

Good luck to you too.
Round 2
Pro
I want to consider determinism, a position which I'm adopting as devil's advocate. I’m a theist and I wholeheartedly believe in free will. However, for the purpose of our debate, I shall momentarily consider it to be true. As part of my devil’s advocate play, I want to offer free will arguments only as means to point out their flaws.

For this debate, I think the problem of free will can be roughly understood through the lens of Aristotle. In his book, Physics classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/physics.html:

For some moving principles can only cause movement in one direction, while others can reverse the direction of their action: thus fire can heat but cannot chill, whereas it seems that one and the same mental skill may act in opposite directions.

I would not imagine solving the question of man’s freedom through an oversimplified event that merely considers agency (i.e. my ability to say yes or no) without natural inclination (i.e. having a set of desires and needs). Nevertheless, free will believers would have me believe that if I wanted a stone to move by the swing of my hand, I could do so. In addition, If I wanted to rebel against the prediction that I will move the stone, I could simply act in what Aristotle would call the "opposite direction". Free will enthusiasts would urge me to believe that my own movements are of my own volition.

This conception of freedom is problematic. The challenge I have in my disposal is that freedom is false and the charge of determinism is true even if I have the ability to say yes or no. A caged raccoon with a mad disease (pick anything that’s contagious) still has the ability to move itself but it cannot will itself to break out of the cage. It has no control over the events that falls on it. My own freedom is also part of this “cage”. Events are predetermined for me. There is no sole arbiter of natural laws, I have them because events have predetermined them for me. There is no sole arbiter of morality, I have feelings to discourage me from committing evil things because events have dictated me to have feelings. I have no control over the events; I merely follow them.

For the sake of this world, I hold that determinism is true and that we are not ultimately responsible for our actions.
 
 

Not published yet
Round 3
Not published yet
Not published yet
Round 4
Not published yet
Not published yet