Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rose Tyler's avatar

This was an interesting take. I just finished reading this book a month or so ago and had a very different reaction to it. I, too, noticed the lack of real engagement with the philosophy of free will but was honestly glad to focus exclusively on the science of it (even as someone who enjoys the humanities very much).

The question strikes me as one that only science can really answer (along the lines of the origin of the universe, the nature of human consciousness, etc), even though philosophy can give us more interesting or insightful ways to frame the question itself. I don’t think it’s philosophy’s job to tell us “is there free will?” but more so to determine what exactly free will would entail (as you note) or to tell us “knowing there is or there isn’t free will, how ought we proceed?”

I think science often vindicates the conclusion philosophy already reached through less conclusive means, as is the case with the Nietzche quote you shared. But that makes the scientific approach incredibly valuable.

That being said, this was a thought-provoking angle and makes me want to wade a little deeper in the philosophical side of things. Thanks for the read!

Expand full comment
Jon Rogers's avatar

Honestly, really enjoyable. And that’s from a spooky libertarian.

Expand full comment
5 more comments...

No posts