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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

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

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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