DOOR 17

Originally posted by knightmeister
If you chose door 8 then what happens? Have you not chosen door 8? Is it impossible to choose door 8? WHITEY

Me thinks you don't quite understand the analogy. You could say that if you chose door 8 then all the other doors would be blocked , but they would have been blocked before you entered the room. The point is that whatever choice you make you ...[text shortened]... e is for there to be more than one staircase. You can only have two staircases with free will.

Please answer the questions as regards the given story. Do not start introducing further complications like supposing the staircase was behind door 8. Upon entering the room in the story can you choose door 8 yes or no?

Originally posted by knightmeister
You forget that the door 17 model could equally be applied to a deliberation. One could say that walking up the door 17 staircase is an analogy for making a mental choice , it doesn't have to be an action , it could equally be a thought.

If the walled up doors are in the mind then create an analogy that displays that. There is a distinct difference between an influence to a choice outcome that is internal and one that is external. An external brick wall forces the choice and effectively means there is no choice. An internal brick wall is a part of the deliberation process and is met after the choice is presented. The will remains free when the wall is internal but is not when the wall is external.

Originally posted by twhitehead
If the walled up doors are in the mind then create an analogy that displays that. There is a distinct difference between an influence to a choice outcome that is internal and one that is external. An external brick wall forces the choice and effectively means there is no choice. An internal brick wall is a part of the deliberation process and is met after ...[text shortened]... presented. The will remains free when the wall is internal but is not when the wall is external.

This makes no sense . If I am free to think about any course of action I like then I can be free to take more than one action. Some doors may be blocked externally but it's unlikely all of them will be . The remaining doors must be blocked internally otherwise I have many course of action I could take. Human beings have many situations where they have real and possible alternatives to choose that are not blocked externally. In your model what causes them to choose door 17 is determinism , therefore all the other doors are impossible because they must be internally blocked.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Please answer the questions as regards the given story. Do not start introducing further complications like supposing the staircase was behind door 8. Upon entering the room in the story can you choose door 8 yes or no?

If I had titled the story door 8 you would be asking if door 17 was possible instead. Door 17 and door 8 are both possible but only with TWO different stories. In determinism you cannot have two staircases that can both be potentially walked within the SAME story because the outcome is inevitable. Door 8 , 17 or 1009878 it makes no difference , the point is many doors but only one possible staircase. The other doors don't even have to open because they will never be chosen due to the fact that the man's brain is programmed for door 17 HOWEVER long he stays in the room.

So in my original story door 8 is always blocked.

Originally posted by knightmeister
This makes no sense . If I am free to think about any course of action I like then I can be free to take more than one action.

Yet in your story you claim this is not the case.

Some doors may be blocked externally but it's unlikely all of them will be.
In your story you claim that all but one are blocked externally. There is no 'likely' or 'unlikely' involved. It is stated as fact.

The remaining doors must be blocked internally otherwise I have many course of action I could take.
Nope, you said they were bricked up with physical bricks.

Human beings have many situations where they have real and possible alternatives to choose that are not blocked externally. In your model what causes them to choose door 17 is determinism , therefore all the other doors are impossible because they must be internally blocked.
Agreed. But that is still free will and does not correspond with your story.

Originally posted by knightmeister
If I had titled the story door 8 you would be asking if door 17 was possible instead. Door 17 and door 8 are both possible but only with TWO different stories. In determinism you cannot have two staircases that can both be potentially walked within the SAME story because the outcome is inevitable. Door 8 , 17 or 1009878 it makes no difference , the poi ...[text shortened]... oor 17 HOWEVER long he stays in the room.

So in my original story door 8 is always blocked.

you said the brain is programmed... therefore, you have contradicted youself, you say in another post we have free will... which is it?

Originally posted by knightmeister
If I had titled the story door 8 you would be asking if door 17 was possible instead. Door 17 and door 8 are both possible but only with TWO different stories. In determinism you cannot have two staircases that can both be potentially walked within the SAME story because the outcome is inevitable. Door 8 , 17 or 1009878 it makes no difference , the poi ...[text shortened]... oor 17 HOWEVER long he stays in the room.

So in my original story door 8 is always blocked.

You don't know how to answer a yes or no question? The mind reading portion of my brain is getting really twitchy! Despite my clearly telling you to leave it at the original story you now introduce door 1009878?
I didn't ask whether the door was blocked, I didn't ask whether the mans brain is programmed to choose door 17, I asked whether choosing door 8 is a real possibility for any entity that enters the room. If it is not then the man is not being presented with a choice at all making your whole story quite stupid.

Originally posted by eatmybishop
you said the brain is programmed... therefore, you have contradicted youself, you say in another post we have free will... which is it?

The brain is programmed and you do have free will. knightmeister is claiming that the two are not compatible but is not getting very far with proving it.

Originally posted by twhitehead
The brain is programmed and you do have free will. knightmeister is claiming that the two are not compatible but is not getting very far with proving it.

don't get it

Originally posted by twhitehead
The brain is programmed and you do have free will. knightmeister is claiming that the two are not compatible but is not getting very far with proving it.

You are not getting that far yourself! LOL

If you are controlled by a programmed nervous system then you are the same in principle as a worm (that is also controlled by a programmed nervous system). More complex yes , but the principle is the same. It doesn't need to be proved , it's self evident.

Originally posted by twhitehead
You don't know how to answer a yes or no question? The mind reading portion of my brain is getting really twitchy! Despite my clearly telling you to leave it at the original story you now introduce door 1009878?
I didn't ask whether the door was blocked, I didn't ask whether the mans brain is programmed to choose door 17, I asked whether choosing door 8 ...[text shortened]... hen the man is not being presented with a choice at all making your whole story quite stupid.

I asked whether choosing door 8 is a real possibility for any entity that enters the room. If it is not then the man is not being presented with a choice at all making your whole story quite stupid. ----whitey


The story just entails one particular man walking through the door (and not 'any entity'😉 so for this one scenario door 8 is not a real possibility for the man...... but
I will re-write it all just for you ...see my door 18 thread.

Originally posted by knightmeister
You are not getting that far yourself! LOL

If you are controlled by a programmed nervous system then you are the same in principle as a worm (that is also controlled by a programmed nervous system). More complex yes , but the principle is the same. It doesn't need to be proved , it's self evident.

...and so once again you prove that in a deterministic universe, things are determined. And what's more, this is incompatible with libertarian free will.

NO ONE IS DISPUTING THIS.

It's like watching the first five minutes of a lecture called "introduction to free will" over and over and over and over and over and over again.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Premise 1 - The door 17 model is a correct representation of human and animal behaviour under determinism.

Premise 2- In the door 17 model a worm may make different choices than a human but looked at from outside has no less freedom of will than a human. The human makes different selections and spends more time in the room but essentially only has ...[text shortened]... ing? How can one then criticise a theist for being committed to an "illusion" that God exists?

This argument is question-begging, since it presumes that free choices must be those where one could have done otherwise. Since compatibilists reject that claim, your argument is irrelevant to their position. Did I not specify that I was looking for a non-question-begging argument against compatibilism? Here, let's try this again:

Premise 1................?

Originally posted by bbarr
This argument is question-begging, since it presumes that free choices must be those where one could have done otherwise. Since compatibilists reject that claim, your argument is irrelevant to their position. Did I not specify that I was looking for a non-question-begging argument against compatibilism? Here, let's try this again:

Premise 1................?

This argument is question-begging, since it presumes that free choices must be those where one could have done otherwise. Since compatibilists reject that claim, your argument is irrelevant to their position. Did I not specify that I was looking for a non-question-begging argument against compatibilism? Here, let's try this again:

Premise 1................? BARR

RESPONSE---

Why don't you just say where my door 18 (or 17 ) model is faulty instead of playing with semanitcs? Do you think the model is faulty? How should it be adjusted? What logical error have I made in constructing it? As you can see I am only too happy to play around with it until I get it right (hence Door 18) ...I can't be any fairer! You either agree with the model or you don't. If you don't then offer me correction and I will come up with a door 19 thread just for you.

Personally , I sat down and came up with it based on my understanding of what human 'free' choices might look like under compatabilism and thought about what the logical implications of having deliberations but also determined choices might look like. It's a clear and simple model . Now it's up to you to bounce off this model. You obviously have a problem with it but you are not going to say what it is are you?

Originally posted by dottewell
...and so once again you prove that in a deterministic universe, things are determined. And what's more, this is incompatible with libertarian free will.

NO ONE IS DISPUTING THIS.

It's like watching the first five minutes of a lecture called "introduction to free will" over and over and over and over and over and over again.

All this I could live with if only one compatabilist would just accept and admit for one millisecond that in respect of being programmed to make certain choices we are no different from worms.