Determinism: Difference between revisions
→Conclusion
m (→Conclusion) |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== '''Introduction''' == | == '''Introduction''' == | ||
Determinism, the idea that every event is determined by past events and the laws of nature, has | Determinism, the idea that every event is determined by past events and the laws of nature, has been one of the central discussions in philosophy for a long time: Is the world deterministic or do we have free will? | ||
This paper examines this question by first introducing the idea of determinism by defining the term from diffenent angles, including the concepts of causality, logic, theology, and the idea that free will can exist in a deterministic world. To better understand determinism, its counterpart, indeterminism, or free will, is also introduced, leading to the following philosophical questions: "Is the universe fundamentally deterministic, | This paper examines this question by first introducing the idea of determinism by defining the term from diffenent angles, including the concepts of causality, logic, theology, and the idea that free will can exist in a deterministic world. To better understand determinism, its counterpart, indeterminism, or free will, is also introduced, leading to the following philosophical questions: "Is the universe fundamentally deterministic, | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
meaning that every single event in the universe has already been predetermined billions of years ago? Do we really have free will the way we think we do, or are all events, including our own actions, merely the inevitable consequences of prior causes?" | meaning that every single event in the universe has already been predetermined billions of years ago? Do we really have free will the way we think we do, or are all events, including our own actions, merely the inevitable consequences of prior causes?" | ||
Throughout history, different views on this question were documented by many philosophers and | Throughout history, different views on this question were documented by many philosophers and scientists. Some of them are presented in this paper: | ||
Isaac Newton, who formulated of the fundamental laws of physics, believed in a deterministic world, governed by those laws, while David Hume, believing free will can coexist with determinism, and Immanuel Kant, who believed in free will, both opposed determinism, asserting it would undermine moral unaccountability in humans. James Williams also leaned against determinism, stating it would deem the concept of regret meaningless. | Isaac Newton, who formulated of the fundamental laws of physics, believed in a deterministic world, governed by those laws, while David Hume, believing free will can coexist with determinism, and Immanuel Kant, who believed in free will, both opposed determinism, asserting it would undermine moral unaccountability in humans. James Williams also leaned against determinism, stating it would deem the concept of regret meaningless. | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Arguments for and against determinism are provided using not just philosophical insights, but also interdisciplinary topics, such as neuroscientific brain experiments and experiments in the field of quantum mechanics, providing insights into modern science and provoking new questions, while encouraging the reader to reach his own conclusion on determinism. | Arguments for and against determinism are provided using not just philosophical insights, but also interdisciplinary topics, such as neuroscientific brain experiments and experiments in the field of quantum mechanics, providing insights into modern science and provoking new questions, while encouraging the reader to reach his own conclusion on determinism. | ||
Finally, the paper discusses the implications determinism would have on the concept of knowledge, posing the question, whether determinism would make our pursuit of truth and understanding inauthentic, as, in the abscence of free will, it would be impossible to independently obtain or question given knowledge. | Finally, the paper discusses the implications determinism would have on the concept of information knowledge, posing the question, whether determinism would make our pursuit of truth and understanding inauthentic, as, in the abscence of free will, it would be impossible to independently obtain or question given knowledge. | ||
== '''Etymology''' == | == '''Etymology''' == | ||
| Line 200: | Line 200: | ||
== '''Conclusion''' == | == '''Conclusion''' == | ||
This paper has examined the issue of determinism and free will by assessing different viewpoints, such as classical philosophy, contemporary neuroscience, and quantum mechanics, also discussing how determinism would affect the idea of information and knowledge. | |||
Shannon's definition of information, as it was concluded, would remain meaningful in a deterministic world, despite a potentially reduced informative content, because all predetermined events would still remain surprising to the reciever of the information if he was unable to predict it correctly, as it would practically often be the case. | Shannon's definition of information, as it was concluded, would remain meaningful in a deterministic world, despite a potentially reduced informative content, because all predetermined events would still remain surprising to the reciever of the information if he was unable to predict it correctly, as it would practically often be the case. | ||
| Line 208: | Line 208: | ||
When it comes to knowlege, it became clear that determinism would make the process of obtaining knowledge just another event caused by the causal chain of events, minimizing our independence and freedom of arriving to knowledge. | When it comes to knowlege, it became clear that determinism would make the process of obtaining knowledge just another event caused by the causal chain of events, minimizing our independence and freedom of arriving to knowledge. | ||
Looking at the viewpoints of different philosophers and scientists, Hume believed that free will and determinism can coexist (compatibilism), Kant argued that free will is fundamental for moral responsibility, Newton believed in a deterministic world ruled by natural laws and James leaned against determinism, stating that a deterministic world would make the concept of regret meaningless. | |||
Furthermore, the neuroscientific field provides insightful experiments, such as Libet’s studies and Sperry's and Gazzaniga's split brain experiments, which challenge the idea of free will by suggesting that decisions may be determined by subconscious processes in the brain, outside of our conscious control, and also that the brain is capable of giving us an illusion of control. If determinism holds true, our actions, beliefs, and decisions could be the result of a complex web of causal chains, leaving us to question the authenticity of our choices. | |||
Opposingly, the double slit experiment conducted in the field of quantum mechanics has introduced the idea of indeterminism, as particles at the quantum level seem to contradict the classical deterministic expectations, instead operating probabilistically. | Opposingly, the double slit experiment conducted in the field of quantum mechanics has introduced the idea of indeterminism, as particles at the quantum level seem to contradict the classical deterministic expectations, instead operating probabilistically. | ||
Also, we showed that the definiton of logical determinism doesn't hold true for all statements, because, for example, certain | Also, we showed that the definiton of logical determinism doesn't hold true for all statements, because, for example, certain Liar Paradox statements cannot be assigned one truth value. | ||
All in all, the answering the question of determinism and free will is more complex than it might seem on the surface, so it may remain unanswered, provoking a never ending debate throughout various disciplines. | |||
== '''References''' == | == '''References''' == | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||