re: #138 Obdicut

If you don’t believe that free will exists, there is no point in talking to you, or in doing anything else.

Oh, I see. Well, that’s too bad. So if I take a position that is supported by a sizable (though not all) portion of the scientific community that studies neuroscience, physics, behavior, etc, then it’s not worth talking to me? Is it not worth talking to Stephen Hawking who also believes free will is an illusion? Or philosopher Dan Dennett? Are the nuances of determined probabilities (a form of determinism) within the quantum world also not worth talking about? Is contra-causal free will a defensible position? It think not, but there is a very healthy debate on this and its sad you would prefer to discard it.

I still feel that you are using the term “free will” in a different manner than I am. That is why I said it is helpful to establish the meaning of the terms we use… .and then you wrote me off. Which is fine, it’s your thread, but then why ask if someone doesn’t believe in free will if you already know the answer you are going to accept, particularly if you are not using the term in the same way?