Thomas_More
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Knowing that choice is motivated, not free, is what has us doing political work to influence minds: trying our best to nudge the chain of causation, of which we are all part, in the direction of socialism.
Fortunately, our work is not alone. Many strands unconsciously support our efforts, as does capitalism’s inability to solve the problems it creates.
” We are more than the sum of materialism and mechanical psychology: we are the sum of that and so much more!”
As i’ve just said, there is more than just the mechanical. But this only makes freedom of the will more ludicrous a notion, since there is so much going on, so many more antecedents in play.
I would say to the drunken driver (because acts have consequences) that, far from the chain of causation being an excuse, it is because it leads him to drive drunk and endanger life, we must remove his access to a vehicle and ensure he doesn’t drive again. If that involves physically isolating him, which he may bemoan as being “punishment”, then so be it. We have to prevent you. It’s the chain of causation.
Anyone saying the will is free is saying his choices are not bound by cause and effect (the chain of causation), but are free and independently made (their own first cause).
In fact, the intricacies of the mind we know about today, with all its subconscious and conscious movements, make the notion of feelings, thoughts and choices being free even more ludicrous than in the days of the mechanical materialists.
” nor does party “exclude non-materialists” as you alleged.”
It doesn’t?
So, if one believes in a non-material soul, and rejects historical materialism, they can join?Which they do anyway, because members there are who believe choices are not bound by cause and effect, but are free; that therefore they are made by an independent “self” not subject to cause and effect.
“…could be infringed with impunity by invoking some clever dick argument like “I was only a link in a chain of causation”?”
Which, from the start, has been you putting words in my mouth.
I said such a person would need to be restrained. How many times do I have to repeat things to you, including my necessarian arguments, just because you must have the last word. You’re like a child.
You see people in socialism still rushing everywhere like mad in motor cars, instead of this pollutive and dangerous mode of transport gradually disappearing in favour of more public transport and better means. You also still see today’s ugly towns and cities and road networks still being around.
I just said restraint would be necessary.
I’m airy-fairy because i’m against prisons, punishments, abuse, incarceration.
Maybe restraint will require some kind of social isolation, but are you thinking of capitalism’s penal institutions?
Why am I airy fairy?
You sound like a Tory mocker of “arty farty liberals.”
And i’m actually for anyone wanting real socialism to be allowed to join us, whatever their philosophy in other areas.
But you’re not, are you?
It wouldn’t, but then they wouldn’t be materialists. Which is ok by me, but the party excludes non-materialists (avowed), which is inconsistent. It’s inconsistency that annoys me.
So Godwin is an airy-fairy philosopher? Which leads me to think you’ve only read bits of interest to you making SPGB points.
In the link I gave you he sums up exactly the laws of causation that are everywhere. Furthermore, he says that, in spite of the facts of causation, the malefactor should still be taken in hand.Godwin airy fairy … Is that your summation of a brilliant mind?
So, I guess you expect all the punitive paraphernalia we have now, in socialism?
See where the denial of cause and effect leads you!
So capitalism is not now the principal cause of the overwhelming majority of crimes, of violent, murderous and suicidal behaviour, of mental illnesses leading to anti-social behaviour?Denying the social chain of causation dumps you back into “It’s human nature.”
http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Godwin/pj71.html
Godwin on punishment.
(I have to ask, ALB, have you REALLY read him?)
