From “Einstein’s Morality”
by Ching-Hung Woo
[b]
[/b]
This part I can understand. If all is governed by the immutable laws of nature, it certainly makes sense that this includes the phenomena embodied in human interaction.
As for the parts embedded in quantum interaction, Einstein suggested that what appears to be random is only a reflection of our lack of understanding of the deeper reality.
And that will, perhaps, always be there: the parts that we don’t even know that we don’t even know yet. Ultimately though, all philosophical quests come back to this.
But then comes the part about determinism and moral responsibility:
[b]
[/b]
This would seem to be just one more rendition of “compatibilism”. And I am still unable to “wrap my mind around it”. It just doesn’t make sense given the manner in which I think about these things.
Whether we focus on “retributive punishment” or are “guided by the welfare of mankind”, we are still doing [b]only that which we could not not have done[/b].
There does not seem to be a way in which to extract ourselves from that which, “for all practical purposes”, must be. Instead, some are able to “trick” themselves by creating this distinction between two different sorts of cause and effect that [to me] seem to be just a word game “in their heads”.
This in other words:
[b]
[/b]
This distinction seems like bullshit to me. Whether we call the laws of matter a manifestation of “prior causes” or “coercion”, we still do only that which we have always been “determined” to do.
As for so-called “self-affirmed” values, what the fuck can that really mean if the “self” itself is only as it could ever be?
Again, the compatibalists may be on to something here, but it has never seemed reasonable to me. So, I am back to either accepting or not accepting that it could never have seemed reasonable to me – in order that “I” be in sync with the immutable laws of matter. At least here and now.
[b]
[/b]
But what here [including the words I am typing and the words you are reading] has anything to do with “ability”? As though what turns out to be could ever have turned out any other way. We “choose” for it to happen, but we really didn’t choose for it to happen.
But then I can see how a belief in this sort of deterministic approach to reality can be comforting for some. After all, they can’t really be held responsible for their fucked up, miserable lives because, well, because.