Sometimes when I get into a conversation about free will, I'll ask someone what other languages he speaks. If he speaks English and took two years of Spanish but hasn't been exposed to any other language, I'll ask if he can suddenly begin speaking in French. If he says no, I'll tell him that if his will is truly free, he SHOULD be able to.
It's a silly argument, but I wonder if there's a more specific category for it among fallacies of logic than "nonsense."
2006-12-31 02:14:45 · 18 answers · asked by night_train_to_memphis 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
You are right - it is a silly argument.
Would be great if free will could make you do that.
No more education - because we free will (know) everything.
2006-12-31 02:21:12 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
One of these three:
AMBIGUITY
Description: An argument in the course of which at least one term is used in different senses. Also known as equivocation. There are several types of "fallacies of ambiguity," including REIFICATION, EQUIVOCATION, AMPHIBOLY, COMPOSITION, DIVISION, and ACCENTUS.
or
AMPHIBOLY
Description: A type of Fallacy of Ambiguity where the ambiguity involved is of an "amphibolous" (equivocal, uncertain) nature. Amphiboly is a syntactic error. The fallacy is caused by faulty sentence structure, and can result in a meaning not intended by the author. "The department store now has pants for men with 32 waists." (How many waists do you have? I have only one!)
or
ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM
Description: An argument that attempts to disprove the truth of what is asserted by attacking the speaker rather than the speaker's argument. Another way of putting it: Fallacy where you attack someone's character instead of dealing with salient issues. There are two basic types of ad hominem arguments: (1) abusive, and (2) circumstantial.
free will
–noun 1. free and independent choice; voluntary decision: You took on the responsibility of your own free will.
2. Philosophy. the doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces.
2006-12-31 02:33:53 · answer #2 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Really not yet "free" !
If it had been, all it takes is just a focus of 'attention' with that kind of DEEP PERCEPTION to take a look at the other person and start speaking in his language, having just 'grasped' it from him with a mere look ! Maybe this too looks as great a fallacy of logic, but has been demonstrated many times since time immemorial !
2006-12-31 03:58:00 · answer #3 · answered by Spiritualseeker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are two fallacies:
- a little change in meaning
- hyperbole (or, may be, a binary opposition)
When we speak about free will, we are are talking about an ethical choice between not less than two options.
therefore:
1) we are not speaking about the power to do anything at free-will
2) choice has to be between two viable options: there is not free will when you have no option or only one option.
Your argument said: if you can't do everything at will, you have no freewill.It's typical (wrong) argument "all or nothing".
(If you could do anything, there would no room for an ethical choice: if you could get anything without stripping any person, where would be ethical problem?)
2006-12-31 02:28:30 · answer #4 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am not sure you have a fallacy because you are starting with a false premise. You simply have an invalid argument. Free will is the ability to choose a course of action based on a set of alternatives. Free will is not the ability to know all the alternatives.
2006-12-31 05:45:29 · answer #5 · answered by Sketch 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
English Language has many a limitations in expressing a few thoughts and meanings, particularly some of the thoughts of eastern philosophy. For example Consciousness or Awareness is used to describe a very fundamental thought in East. But these English words will not convey the accurate meaning.
Possibly, just possibly, Free will is the english translation of another word in another school of thought. What you refer to in your question is not at all about Free will but Free Wish!
Humans have the ability to know right from the wrong , good from the bad. In general two contrasting things inlife. We say the Humans have freedom or free will to choose between the two.
2006-12-31 02:44:36 · answer #6 · answered by YD 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
your argument is weak in that you expect something to occur out of a vacuum. You present an argument and draw a new idea out of thin air. There are several fallacies in deductive reasoning; first, is the drawing a flase conclusion from true premises. For example:
Premise 1: All birds have feathers can fly
Premise 2: Ostriches have feathers.
Therefore: Ostriches can fly (Invalid)
The are several others. but can be rather difficult to explain in such condensed fashion.
2006-12-31 03:40:54 · answer #7 · answered by tigranvp2001 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The fallacy is not deductive: you are simply providing a wrong axiom. Your characterisation of free will is wrong.
To assert that humans have free will is not to assert that they have unconstrained choices, but just that the constraints are not sufficient in all cases to remove all choice.
You can still believe in free will and believe that we hardly ever get to exercise it. To assert that humans have no free will is to assert we never get a choice.
Choices, whether you subscribe to free will or not, may be illusory. We often think we have a choice that we don't really have.
2006-12-31 02:39:33 · answer #8 · answered by sago 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
maximum Christians have on no account even study the full Bible. Any self respecting atheist has. So the atheist has an benefit on that front. maximum Christians think of that we are meant to have blind faith. we are meant to have self assurance yet no longer with out some info. The Bible says in basic terms a depraved and perverse era needs an indication to have self assurance. seem on the international now however, that's what we are in. Matthew 7:7 says Ask you and could recieve, seek for and you will locate, knock and the door with be opened to you. in case you have doubts and want some info, merely ask for it.
2016-11-25 02:44:45 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
as a matter of logical free will , it is then my free will to choose not to choose and / or choose not to learn !, but then again that is only in this demension and reality, and not necessarily the case in alternative deminsions and / or realitys, let again within a quasality loop, or perhaps a co existant dementional intrusion within a quantum flux, between dimensions ! temperal mechanics aren't they just wonderful !, lol, so have i sufficiantly played with your mind yet, or should i continue, lol !
2006-12-31 02:22:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wonder why you believe that free will is like magic? It is not. His free will would be that he can learn French if he wants to speak it, but not necessarily that he can speak or understand it with out previously having been exposed to it.
2006-12-31 04:15:45 · answer #11 · answered by LindaLou 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋