I have decided to substantially edit this post because the article underlying this discussion is fairly complex.
My interest in this topic was motivated by Dan Falk's In Search of Time which is a popular science treatment of the enigma of time. After discussing some of the freaky implications of Einstein's theory of special relativity, Falk refers to Hilary Putnam (born July 31, 1926), the American philosopher pictured to the right. Putnam used the absence of a universal "now" to argue that future events are fully predetermined. Falk goes on the explain as follows:
"Let's say that an event - an election, for example, is in my future, but in your past. (Again, though it may seem odd, this is quite plausible in special relativity, depending on our speeds and the distances involved.) Putnam argues that at the moment when we pass, I am obligated to consider "real" everything that you consider real - including the results of the not-yet-held election! (Not yet held from my perspective that is.) This clearly plays havoc with our traditional ideas of free will and the "openness" of the future. And it's not just the future that gets an overhaul: by a similar line of reasoning, I am obligated to regard "as still real" events that seem to lie in my past but that may be in the present from your perspective."
Putnam's article Time and Physical Geometry can be found in the The Journal of Philosophy Vol. 64, No. 8 (Apr. 27, 1967).
The future is as real (and, more to the point, is as predetermined) as the present and the past. If that doesn't blow your mind, I don't know what will. If I was a fundamentalist Christian, I would find this proposition more threatening than the theory of evolution.
I will be discussing the philosophical implications of quantum mechanics in future posts but I need to figure out quantum mechanics first.
I'm not sure what connection the topic of free will has to the goal of Atheism.
ReplyDeleteWhile Catholicism is linked to free will, Protestantism and Islam are linked to predestination, and to obeying fate or destiny (kismet), which is, of course, a form of determinism.
This determinism is especially strong in Islam. Some American military advisors in Jordania noted they care very little about maintaining the equipment: they kinda think if Allah wants it to work, it will, if he doesn't, it wont. Doesn't it sound like a deterministic, no-free-will approach to you?
Thus, there is a chance that the only result of convincing everybody that free will doesn't exist would not be a move away from religions (as I think you hope so), but a move away from freewillist religions (Catholicism) towards deterministic ones (Protestantism and especially Islam).
Shenpen, I don't know much about Islam and I find your story about the supposed predestined maintenance of military equipment interesting. However, I maintain that the concept of free will is an essential underpinning of Christianity and you can pick any one of the different 38,000 sects you like. First of all, if you are predestined to sin, it's not your fault so who cares if Jesus died to atone for them? Secondly, if everything is predestined, it is already determined that you are either going to heaven or hell so, again, why bother with religion at all?
ReplyDeleteSee, I don't really know much about this stuff, but I suppose you should ask a Calvinist about predestination, because they are pretty strong on this idea. Or they were 500 years ago, of that I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteOtherwise.
http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/AD_Issues/amdipl_17/articles/deatkine_arabs1.html
This is the article about god's will vs. maintenance of equipment. And other stuff.
It would a strange irony of life if convincing people to don't believe in free will would cause them to believe in Islam, but it has higher than zero probability, it seems to me determinism is very strogn there. Read this article, it's very interesting.