this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2024
101 points (100.0% liked)

memes

22668 readers
309 users here now

dank memes

Rules:

  1. All posts must be memes and follow a general meme setup.

  2. No unedited webcomics.

  3. Someone saying something funny or cringe on twitter/tumblr/reddit/etc. is not a meme. Post that stuff in !the_dunk_tank@www.hexbear.net, it's a great comm.

  4. Va*sh posting is haram and will be removed.

  5. Follow the code of conduct.

  6. Tag OC at the end of your title and we'll probably pin it for a while if we see it.

  7. Recent reposts might be removed.

  8. Tagging OC with the hexbear watermark is praxis.

  9. No anti-natalism memes. See: Eco-fascism Primer

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

My point is that if we are materialists there is no reason for us to believe in free will. Some hard determinist arguments make total sense they are just far too optimistic about how easily the world is known. Dialectics complicates things and brings us closer to the truth of how the universe works.

[–] Maoo@hexbear.net 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

So... not the thing I said? I honestly can't tell. The relevance of this conversation to Marxism is in our part, and agency within, the dialectic.

[–] QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I agree, the question is whether the word "agency" implies free will or not. I recognize "wills" with agency, but "free" implies it is beyond the material world in part.

[–] Maoo@hexbear.net 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Don't get tripped up by etymology! It's of questionable value to semantics.

There have been arguments for free will that depended on the supernatural and I think that's what the critics here are focusing on. To contradict myself, the origins of the term are with the Catholic Church and intended to justify very specific supernatural positions.

But it's not an inherent aspect of the claim, philosophically. Nerds have been arguing about this for millennia and have enumerated a very long list of framings that make their position (pro or con sliced ten different ways) possible (the lowest of philosophical claims). This includes, but is not limited to, hardline atheistic materialists like Daniel Dennett, a compatibilist.

[–] QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 6 months ago

I am skeptical of the possibility of a true materialist free will argument but I will look into it. I’ll look into Dennett. I think we understand each other’s positions better now. Thanks for the interesting, at times annoying, but ultimately relatively fun discussion. Is there anyone else I should look into?