Regardless of if it’s practical to live that way in daily life, the world seems pretty determined. Everything happens because a vast amount of interactions between infinite factors causes it to. You can’t really say you choose between things as many influences have been taken in by you and many things have affected your psychological state. Has everything been practically decided by the big bang? Now, this is not to say we can know everything or predict the future, but we know what’s likely. Socialism or extinction may be inevitable, but we don’t know yet. Socialism can only happen if people keep fighting, regardless. People will be convinced or principled or not. Science seems to agree with this, and only few, like the wrong Sartre would propose we have ultimate free will. So are there any arguments against determinism? I know there is a saying that you’re freer when you recognize how your freedom is restricted, and that recognition may make your actions better, but isn’t there ultimately no freedom?

  • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.mlOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I agree to a certain extent. It’s definitely not the most important question, but as materialists we at least have a basis for discussing it. I think in any society freedom doesn’t really exist. Freedom is meaningless because we are subject to conditions and roles and biology. Freedom suggests a Cartesian dualism. A spirit separate from the body.

    Tl;dr - relations are not deterministic, especially not at the level of ecology or society.

    I think you are substituting deterministic for simple or mechanical here.

    Likewise, some of the earliest organisms on earth, which produced oxygen, created the conditions for the atmosphere as we know it.

    Very true, this points to the absurd and unlikely nature of our existence. Everything had to go “right” up to this point. That does not contradict determinism.

    Does something worth calling free will “emerge” out of this fact? I think so, at least.

    I’ll look into it.

    Edit: socialism limits “freedom” to accumulate, be antisocial, or be poor, but promotes a default of flourishing.