Philosophical issue (edited)

[Wozza]

Unless that insight was actually likely to cause harm of course, if it was borne of an illness perhaps.

I honestly don’t know what this person has written but if he’s saying that we don’t have free will then I don’t need to read it. I disagree. As a Catholic I don’t see why God would have given us this life which involves a great deal of decision making if we were unable to think freely and make choices of our own free will. You see, I actually believe in God, I don’t blindly follow a religion, I’ve already exercised free will.

There is an atomic basis to all thought I’ve no doubt but as I’ve asked, does a grain of sand explain the pyramids? No.

If you simply define free will as being a choice between chocolate and vanilla then maybe you need to read the book. If you think that there is only one defiiton of free will then you need to read the book. If you think that a lack of free will, as Harris describes it, absolves us from acts we commit and conflicts with our sense of morality, then you need to read the book.

And yeah, I’m familiar with the claims that reductionist/materialist thinking doesn’t allow one to see the big picture. It’s a fallacy. Trust me. I’m a materialist and I can see the grain of sand and see the pyramid. And I’ll check out the validity of that statement in the new year as I’ll be visiting the pyramids. And studying grains of sand.

 

[Beryllos]

A few years ago I followed Sam Harris’ blog and found it fairly interesting. I didn’t read all he wrote about free will, but I gather that materialism can lead one to a kind of determinism.

I enjoyed his articles on self defense and personal security.

He wrote a great a book about lying. In it he makes a good case for telling the truth always. It makes a lot more sense than most of the CAF Philosophy threads on the morality of lying.