Why Determinism Fails (Feel Free to Disagree!)

Are humans physical machines determined by the laws of chemistry and physics? Has science shown that free will is a myth? Sean and Scott invite Biola philosophy professor Greg Ganssle to discuss the recent book Determined by Robert Sapolsky. They discuss the nature of free will, respond to common arguments in favor of determinism, and talk about why this issue matters so much for human flourishing.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
TikTok: @sean_mcdowell

[stephencoakley]

"You are Free to Disagree" - I see what you did there.

[GhostBearCommander]

No free will = no guilt.

We cannot be called depraved or commendable in any sense without free will.

Merely passive recipients of the assigned roll of whatever determined us to do things.

[TimothyFish]

I think a lot of us are giving a lot more thought to the question of free will because of Leighton Flowers. While I've never really bought the idea of compatibilism, I used to have the idea that maybe it could work, somehow, in some weird way. After listening to Leight Flowers quite a bit, I'm left thinking that it's just nonsense.

[peterfox]

I fail to see how Compatibilism somehow grants moral responsibility. If we do what we want, and what we want is determined, then what we do is determined.

[HJM]

SAME problem for compatabalists: you can’t be caused to desire something and have no ability to choose against your desire, and still be held responsible. It IS defacto determinism.

[darrennelson]

Compatibilistic free will is not free will in any way most people would recognize as free. It claims that a will is free if it can do what it wants. But all your wants are determined by outsides forces. To call that "free will" is double speak.

[jamesbarksdale]

Interesting discussion. I was watching a "sugar" expert on a nutrition channel recently.

He's a scientist and also a nutrition advocate.

I was surprised to hear him say that he's a determinist, believing that people, in particular, certain poor populations are predisposed to eating highly processed and other junk foods. He was much more detailed than this.

His solution, however, is to have the Federal Government tell us what we can and cannot eat.

Why, I thought, would I give up my perceived freedom to choose what food I eat to a group of politicians and judges, who are also living under the illusion of their freedom to choose, to determine what I eat? 🤯

[chrisbarrett]

I think one of the challenges faced by the determinist is not only to establish that a unique mechanism exists where a given current event is solely linked to a prior set of events, but also they would need to demonstrated that this causal set is unique when compared to other sets of events both materially and relationally.

[horridhenry]

Sean, your channel is big enough, why don’t you get Sapolsky on with Ganselle, let them discuss the issue. You are of course free to ignore my suggestion.

[mortensimonsen]

Determinism destroys everything human. To write books defending it is to acknowledge you don’t really believe it, because why bother convincing anyone?

On the other hand: free will is a miracle. We cannot even perceive how anything could be without a cause. Not even in the spiritual world. So we free-willers must do more than debunk determinsim, we must also admit our deep seated faith in some profound and mysterious.

I don’t think this podcast went far enough in either direction (critique of determinism or explanation of free will). This topic is waaaay more radical

[yiqingwang]

Growing up as an atheist, I only came to believe that we have free wills when I read and believe "GOD IS LOVE " (1 John 4 8)
God demonstrated his perfect love for us through Jesus Christ. He redeemed us with his own flesh and blood.

Without free will, we can't love.

[thirdplace]

Divine determinism of all things is rejected in scripture. See Jeremiah 19:5 and 32:35.

[Sternschnuppen]

Your videos are all such blessings! I’ve been struggling with some doubts for a while and really appreciate your insight and stories of others. You help address some hard, difficult issues and questions that we all think about. Thank you

[Psmcdoug]

Science, in this case neuroscience, is interesting and we should study and learn as much as we can. However, for me this book is just the most recent example of what I see scientists do all the time. They gain a little knowledge in the laboratory and then they try to extrapolate that data well beyond what is actually verifiable scientifically. There is a lack of humility in the sciences. Science has done so much to improve our lives, but my goodness, they prove every day that a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing!

[gregorytoews]

12:38 "something that feels like a decision". How do we know when something feels like a decision? How are we to know what a decision is?

[semidemiurge]

Personally knowing Robert, if you had invited him, he would have been more than willing to discuss his book with you. Did you ask?

[RLBays]

I'm not free to disagree - I was always going to disagree based on my biochemistry and environment :)

[leftykiller]

The best argument I heard for determinism was from a discussion between Alex O’Conner and Ben Shapiro, in which Alex philosophically argued for determinism from the “law of non-contradiction.” I think there are some serious flaws in his argument, but it was something I had to listen to a few times to fully get it, and then think about for a while before I saw the problems with it.

[PhilLeith]

But then again ... whether or not we get rid of free will has already been determined ... as far as determinists are concerned.

[jamesbarksdale]

Compatibalism is a fallacy.

J.I. Packer argued, unsuccessfully, for this in Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God.

Because I will to do what God has predetermined for me to do, no matter how "free" it appears to be, does not make it free.

Perceived freedom of the will is not free in any sense of the word.

Determinists, in particular, Calvinists, have a serious problem here.