In addition to what Wix said, if you’d like a deeper elaboration of his point the book to read is “Freedom Evolves”. (There are very similar passages there—I thought that was the source before seeing Wix’s response). This is the book that really sold compatibilism to me, changing my view of it from “hmm, interesting argument, but isn’t it a bit of a cop-out?” to “wow, free will makes much more sense viewed this way”.
Interesting reaction. I shall admit that even though Eliezer’s free will sequence was intellectually convincing to me, it did not change my alief that free will just isn’t there and isn’t even a useful allusion. So this is going on my reading list.
In addition to what Wix said, if you’d like a deeper elaboration of his point the book to read is “Freedom Evolves”. (There are very similar passages there—I thought that was the source before seeing Wix’s response). This is the book that really sold compatibilism to me, changing my view of it from “hmm, interesting argument, but isn’t it a bit of a cop-out?” to “wow, free will makes much more sense viewed this way”.
Interesting reaction. I shall admit that even though Eliezer’s free will sequence was intellectually convincing to me, it did not change my alief that free will just isn’t there and isn’t even a useful allusion. So this is going on my reading list.
What? You are clearly anticipating as if you have control over your actions, or you would not have attempted to type that comment.
(assuming you are acting approximately like a decision maker. Only agents need to anticipate as if they have free will)
No, it just happened. You’re underestimating the degree to which people can have different aliefs.
Precisely what I currently think, except with a little more emphasis and more colorful words.
Guess I’ll have to look at that book.
Thanks! It’s being delivered to my Kindle right now.