Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Conflating causal determination with causal bypassing is ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Interpreting determinism as bypassing and inferring the lack of free will and responsibility from that interpretation is rational.

    Conflating causal determination with causal bypassing is a conceptual error, not a rational inference from determinism's actual content.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Causal determination means events follow necessarily from prior states; causal bypassing means agents lack input into outcomes. These are logically distinct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Confusing distinct concepts leads to invalid inferences. We should analyze what determinism actually entails before drawing conclusions about agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Determinism is compatible with agents being part of causal chains that determine outcomes; this differs from being causally excluded from the process.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If my decisions are fully determined by prior causes, then 'I' am not the source of causal efficacy—prior causes are. This seems like bypassing, not confusion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between 'being determined' and 'being bypassed' collapses when we ask: does the agent's reasoning control the outcome or does physics?
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Calling this a 'conceptual error' sidesteps the hard problem: whether determined agency preserves meaningful causal responsibility at all.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Free Will & Foreknowledge1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    Calling this a 'conceptual error' sidesteps the hard problem: whether determined...Causal determination means events follow necessarily from prior states; causal b...Confusing distinct concepts leads to invalid inferences. We should analyze what ...Determinism is compatible with agents being part of causal chains that determine...
    +3 moreShow less
    If my decisions are fully determined by prior causes, then 'I' am not the source...Interpreting determinism as bypassing and inferring the lack of free will and re...The distinction between 'being determined' and 'being bypassed' collapses when w...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit