Okay, so I was stirring the pot hopping for more reactions on the previous post of You Have NO Free Will. For those who did post gratitude flows your way. By the time I posted the argument I had already discovered it's weakness.
There is a doubling up of definitions and the point of view is from looking back and not being in the moment. The definition says "Sufficient Reason=There is enough reason (or cause) to guarantee the out come of a decision." Saying sufficient is guaranteed is a fallacy and doubles the definition. Ask anyone, what's the difference between sufficient and guaranteed? Sufficient is enough of, it meets minimum requirement for, it fulfills the need. Guaranteed is absolute, definite, couldn't be another way. One says you have room for more the other does not. You cannot substitute one as the other.
This means at the moment of decision if you have sufficient cause to chose one way, you can have sufficient cause to go several ways and it does not guarantee anything. It is your own choice preconditioned or not. You can go against the environment and conditioning. Choice abounds in every moment. We may have patterns and habits but anyone can see those can be broken or remade. Life lays gloriously open to us in a field of options.
The other problem of the argument is it views certainty from a future point due to hindsight. It was saying you had to make that decision be cause you made that decision which makes it a circular argument.
In the end you have sufficient reason for several choices and it's up to you. The boy from the hood can buck the trend, find a new path and get away from the ghetto. There are living stellar examples out there. Congratulations you are a free agent able to act in any way you choose. You are also free to receive the consequences of those actions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Yup. Except that very last senetnce is not completely realistic or true by nature.
Post a Comment