A skeptical look at Casual Determinism
Does the philosophy of naturalism entails or assumes casual determinism? what is the relation between casual determinism and naturalism? while reading about free will i was studying more about the concept of determinsim. I came across this post by philosopher Prof. Massimo Pigliucci where he gives a skeptical look at the concept of casual determinism. He criticises prominent atheists like Sam Harris and Alex Rosenberg for taking determinism as given. below is my summary of his main points

His important points are :
1. predictability doesn't automatically entail determinism : a system may be highly predictable but still not deterministic like chaotic or quantum mechanical systems.

2. The concepts like causation and Laws of nature which are used to defend the concept of determinism are themselves highly controversial. There is no single accepted definition of these terms are what we exactly mean by them is highly debatable. (a point theists should keep in mind before they talk about first cause and where did the laws came etc)

3. current theories of physics have not fully settled the issues

I request people who are interested in this topic to read his posts and other papers he cites. He concludes that he is agnostic about this .
[+] 1 user Likes SUBRAMANNYA PADDILLAYA's post

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)