Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Erosion of Free Will: Why Society's Loss of Belief in Freedom Is Dangerous

read.lukeburgis.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 91 posts

Re: The Erosion of Free Will: Why Society's Loss of Belief in Freedom Is Dangerous

#41

Post by lambdaphagy »

photochemsyn wrote: post #21

"In the Jewish and Christian traditions, free will has been foundational" "The view from Athens (the city of Reason) has been mixed" Come on, isn't this just a bit of a narrow-minded set of premises to start arguing from? Can't we at least stretch out Athens to encompass the Babylonian and Egyptian astronomers and numerologists, at least? And, hey, why'll were at it, you could admit that the Abrahamic tradition that…

I think you're getting downvoted for suggesting that all the great world religious traditions were comparable in their influence on Western civilization, the civilization that the author knows best, is part of, and writes about.

In point of fact, the West draws primarily from the Hebrew messianic tradition and Hellenic philosophy. The influence of other systems of thought, while not literally zero (notably in the case of Islam) is just not comparable to that of Athens and Jerusalem. However valuable these other traditions might have been, they didn't shape the West like these two.

Re: The Erosion of Free Will: Why Society's Loss of Belief in Freedom Is Dangerous

#42

Post by stametseater »

uoaei wrote: post #39
traject_ wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is "reactionary" inherently wrong or "progressive" inherently correct? Why can't people use more clear language rather than relying on Whig history to make their points. If what they are saying is morally wrong according to the truth (and that might be so), clearly state why that is the case rather than obscuring with terms like "progressive", "social justice" or "reactionary". “We are fond of talking about 'libe…

"Why is progress bad?" is not a take I'd have expected to see on HN considering the wealth of techno-utopianism happily and repeatedly expressed here.

If that which is called 'progressive' is necessary progress because it contains the substring 'progress', then the DPRK must be a democratic republic.

Re: The Erosion of Free Will: Why Society's Loss of Belief in Freedom Is Dangerous

#43

Post by photochemsyn »

lambdaphagy wrote: post #41
photochemsyn wrote: post #21

"In the Jewish and Christian traditions, free will has been foundational" "The view from Athens (the city of Reason) has been mixed" Come on, isn't this just a bit of a narrow-minded set of premises to start arguing from? Can't we at least stretch out Athens to encompass the Babylonian and Egyptian astronomers and numerologists, at least? And, hey, why'll were at it, you could admit that the Abrahamic tradition that…

I think you're getting downvoted for suggesting that all the great world religious traditions were comparable in their influence on Western civilization, the civilization that the author knows best, is part of, and writes about. In point of fact, the West draws primarily from the Hebrew messianic tradition and Hellenic philosophy. The influence of other systems of thought, while not literally zero (notably in the cas…

I think I'm getting downvoted because some people don't want to come to grips with the actual argument, and persist in grasping onto their benighted picture of history because it helps them to perpetuate their own modern-day mythology, if you follow?

Re: The Erosion of Free Will: Why Society's Loss of Belief in Freedom Is Dangerous

#44

Post by harvey9 »

uoaei wrote: post #39
traject_ wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is "reactionary" inherently wrong or "progressive" inherently correct? Why can't people use more clear language rather than relying on Whig history to make their points. If what they are saying is morally wrong according to the truth (and that might be so), clearly state why that is the case rather than obscuring with terms like "progressive", "social justice" or "reactionary". “We are fond of talking about 'libe…

"Why is progress bad?" is not a take I'd have expected to see on HN considering the wealth of techno-utopianism happily and repeatedly expressed here.

There's a variety of viewpoints on here. One view repeatedly expressed does not, fortunately, preclude other views.

Re: The Erosion of Free Will: Why Society's Loss of Belief in Freedom Is Dangerous

#46

Post by uoaei »

harvey9 wrote: post #44
uoaei wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Why is progress bad?" is not a take I'd have expected to see on HN considering the wealth of techno-utopianism happily and repeatedly expressed here.

There's a variety of viewpoints on here. One view repeatedly expressed does not, fortunately, preclude other views.

Right but every culture has its taboos. I am merely re-evaluating the way I understand HN culture.

Re: The Erosion of Free Will: Why Society's Loss of Belief in Freedom Is Dangerous

#47

Post by DangitBobby »

Barrin92 wrote: post #13

> In the Jewish and Christian traditions, free will has been foundational This is not correct in the case of Christianity, I can't comment on Judaism because I'm not familiar enough with it. In the Catholic tradition the importance and nature of free will varies a lot depending on the period, in Protestantism there's a significant emphasis on predestination. Starting with debates between Erasmus and Luther, but most…

> in Protestantism there's a significant emphasis on predestination. Starting with debates between Erasmus and Luther, but most strongly in Calvinism where ultimately fate is responsible for salvation alone.

That's very interesting. I grew up Southern Baptist and there was a huge emphasis on free will and being responsible for your salvation because you would always be able to accept Jesus. To believe people were just always going to Heaven or Hell no matter what they did kind of seems... Well that's definitely not a religion I would want to be a part of.

I guess there was always this "but he knows what you're gonna do" thing that almost feels like destiny, but it was because he knows you so well, not because you were destined to.

Re: The Erosion of Free Will: Why Society's Loss of Belief in Freedom Is Dangerous

#48

Post by shswkna »

cypherpunks01 wrote: post #29

"Without free will, there can be no real love." What? This seems totally backwards. Author thinks that real love comes from free conscious decisiomaking? Like freely choosing which model of car to buy? I almost laughed out loud when I got to the subhead "A Childish Conversation". Some points are okay, but overall this is just not a well argued piece. Strikes me as just conveying numerous fairly boring grievances.

There is merit in trying to understand where the author is coming from (which I am choosing to do), as opposed to critiquing the piece from the framework of contemporary society (which is also a valid approach).

> "Without free will, there can be no real love."

This reveals something about the author and his possible life experiences.

When it comes to love between humans, what does love actually mean? We ”fall” in love, which is largely based on chemical and physical characteristics. Correct, it is debatable how much choice there is.

I am still to meet a couple that after 20 years together, still feel like they have fallen in love, in the original sense. At some stage, there comes a point where it feels like a choice is made: Do I appreciate the person for whom they are? Do I choose to get hung up on their annoying characteristics, or do I make an effort to see them for who they are? Do I give them the security to reveal their unguarded version of themselves? And so on.

This applies to all human relationships, even to one’s children. We can close our minds and avoid or hate, or we can overcome and seek.

That is what I think the author meant with love. “Falling in love”, is not the kind of love that is chosen.

Re: The Erosion of Free Will: Why Society's Loss of Belief in Freedom Is Dangerous

#49

Post by fsckboy »

woodruffw wrote: post #36
traject_ wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is "reactionary" inherently wrong or "progressive" inherently correct? Why can't people use more clear language rather than relying on Whig history to make their points. If what they are saying is morally wrong according to the truth (and that might be so), clearly state why that is the case rather than obscuring with terms like "progressive", "social justice" or "reactionary". “We are fond of talking about 'libe…

I didn’t use the word “progressive.” I only used the word “reactionary.” I’m not interested in an argument about “Whig history,” because this isn’t a house party. It’s a comment chain on a tech forum where the originating post doesn’t even do us the dignity of substantiating itself: it just proudly assumes that we all know these things, and that we’re all going to agree with the author if we can just pay attention fo…

use of the word reactionary 99% marks you as a progressive, reactionary is a dog whistle. If you don't like that others have polluted your word, easy to edit your post and choose another word.

Re: The Erosion of Free Will: Why Society's Loss of Belief in Freedom Is Dangerous

#50

Post by dang »

woodruffw wrote: post #16

This is reactionary drivel, of the first order: make up a claim (that people “no longer believe” in freedom), and then somersault backwards into blaming whoever’s on the menu today (in this case, vague motions towards social justice). One might wonder whether these sorts of authors find themselves involuntarily compelled to write these sorts of things. No amount of actually asking people what they believe would suppo…

You may be right (I haven't looked) but please don't call names or fulminate in HN comments. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

No one is saying you owe somersaulting reactionary drivelers better but you owe this community better if you're participating in it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN