Saturday, February 04, 2012

Another New Atheist setting his hair on fire

The 19th century mathematician and historian of philosophy Augustus DeMorgan once issued a warning for the scientist who tried to venture into metaphysics: "[W]hen he tries to look down his own throat with a candle in his hand," he said, he needs to "take care that he does not set his head on fire."

Despite the warning, scientists have been setting their hair on fire ever since. And with the onset of the New Atheists, the need for philosophical fire extinguishers has grown exponentially.

The result has been scientists who, rather than assent to the existence of God, will believe in almost anything. One example is multiple universes, recently proposed by, among others, physicist Stephen Hawking. The belief in this, we are told with a straight face, is more rational than believing in God.

This is not a new idea, of course, having already been thought up--and rejected--by the Greeks.

Another more recent example is Jerry Coyne, a biologist who regularly practices philosophy without a license. He wrote an opinion piece for USA Today a month or so back wherein he announced to the world that free will was an illusion. Coyne's intellectual gears too are stuck in an earlier time, in his case, the early 20th century positivistic materialism that most philosophers themselves--including most of those who came up with the idea in the first place--abandoned back about the 1960s.

But Jerry still hasn't gotten the memo.

In his new post, he wrestle's with the only other theory of free will more absurd than is own materialistic one, namely compatiabalism--the idea that determinism and free will are consistent with one another. Coyne at least realizes that won't fly, but then, seeing that the only other alternative is to go outside his little materialistic world, he bites the bullet and denies free will.

At least we can credit Coyne with being consistently wrong.

13 comments:

Lee said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lee said...

I have become fascinated with the subject of free will vs. determinism since giving up (of my own free will?) the Baptist denomination several years ago for the Presbyterian Church in America.

For there is religious determinism too, as there is atheist determinism.

> only other theory of free will more absurd than is own materialistic one, namely compatiabalism

I had never heard that word before, but it seems to me that the Bible supports elements of both world views. We are on the one hand held responsible for our sins, and on the other hand informed (e.g., by Paul) that faith is a gift, otherwise we are "dead in sin."

It seems to me that there must be some element of determinism involved here, or else the concept of an omniscient God is degraded. If free will were as free as all that, then God must be sitting in the bleachers with a beer and a hotdog, on the edge of His seat, dying to find out how it all ends.

Lee said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism

The discussion reminds me of the "redneck" comedian Ron White, who tells the story of being drunk and getting thrown out of a New York bar. He's squaring off against the bouncers, and then the police showed up.

"I had the right to remind silent," Ron quips, "but not the ability."

KyCobb said...

Lee,

"It seems to me that there must be some element of determinism involved here, or else the concept of an omniscient God is degraded."

Exactly. Free will is incompatible with an omniscient and omnipotent God who has predetermined the course of the universe. Free will can only exist if consciousness is an emergent property of evolved brains.

In other news, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has held Prop. 8 unconstitutional. I haven't read the opinion, but I would bet it says, as I have been saying, that there is no rational basis for the ban.

Lee said...

All intellectual roads lead to a gay marriage debate.

Lee said...

A Reformed theologian might say that it simply means free will isn't what we think it is. He might argue (as I insinuated with the Ron White quip) that we have free will insofar as choosing the things we're capable of choosing. The idea of predestination is that unless the Lord chooses us first, we are incapable of choosing him.

But that's all theoretical stuff. It would seem that free will has problems of its own as well.

Art said...

Free will is incompatible with an omniscient and omnipotent God who has predetermined the course of the universe.

Of course, the concept of free will is perfectly consistent with that of an omniscient and omnipotent god that oversees an infinite number of universes (or realities), whose number can account for all possible contingencies and outcomes.

Lee said...

The argument towards determinism from a materialistic perspective is fascinating to me too. LaPlace's demon is the notion that all things could be predicted using classical mechanics, if one knew all there was to know about the locations of atoms and forces in the universe.

Some things are predictable even by pedestrian neophytes such as myself. When I walk into a bar, I know I'm going to get a beer. When my wife turns on the TV, I know she is going to put on a space opera (Star Trek, StarGate, Babylon 5, Farscape, you name it). When the President gives a speech, I know he will complain about partisanship and attack Republicans.

KyCobb said...

Art,

"Of course, the concept of free will is perfectly consistent with that of an omniscient and omnipotent god that oversees an infinite number of universes (or realities), whose number can account for all possible contingencies and outcomes."

I would say not. It appears you are saying that every possible outsome will occur in some universe. But each version of you will have his choices predetermined by God. In that case, the aggregate of "Art" had no choice except to do everything he could possibly do.

KyCobb said...

Lee,

"LaPlace's demon is the notion that all things could be predicted using classical mechanics, if one knew all there was to know about the locations of atoms and forces in the universe."

Though of course now we know from quantum mechanics that that is not possible.

"Some things are predictable even by pedestrian neophytes such as myself."

Though none of your examples is absolutely predetermined. When you walk into a bar, you might, for example, get an emergency call and have to leave before you order your beer. Your wife's space opera might be preempted by a test of the emergency broadcast system, and the President might announce that he has reached a compromise with Congress that includes a jobs program and a long term deficit reduction deal (unlikely, I know). Humans are creatures of habit, but we are also constantly in a state of change until the day we die.

p.s. What does your wife think of Firefly? I've heard a lot of good things about it, and I might watch it on Netflix.

Lee said...

> Though of course now we know from quantum mechanics that that is not possible.

That may be an overstatement. Maybe we just don't recognize the patterns yet.

> Though none of your examples is absolutely predetermined...

I was joking. Should I use smiley-faces?

Q: How many liberals does it take to find a sense of humor?

A: That's not funny!

:)

> p.s. What does your wife think of Firefly? I've heard a lot of good things about it, and I might watch it on Netflix.

The Wife loves Firefly. But it's difficult to find a space opera she doesn't like. The one that jumps out at me, she has never liked Battlestar Galactica, either in its original incarnation (with Lorne Greene) or the more recent re-make. My theory is that Battlestar Galactica was heavy-duty, the aliens-are-out-to-annihilate-us stuff, and she prefers much lighter fare. Literally, what she wants is a soap opera set in outer space, and there are many takers on that theme.

We both enjoy "GalaxyQuest", for different reasons. She likes it because it makes fun of *Star Trek*, and I like it because it *makes fun* of Star Trek.

KyCobb said...

Lee,

"I was joking. Should I use smiley-faces?"

I know! I just wanted to make a point.
I loved GalaxyQuest; who better to parody Shatner than Tim Allen? I did like BSG; I thought it was great drama, and being set in a fictional universe, it tackeled issues relating to the war on terror and the Gulf War like nothing else.

Bible Trivia said...

I used to care about the philosophy of atheists back when I thought there might be something I should know. Maybe they knew something that we just don't want to hear. Now I know they have no idea and their ramblings have no more footing then the things they profess to refute.

And what really killed my interest is realizing no one else cares about atheist philosophy...even atheists. They have a audience of like 3 people and two of them are disagreeing Christians.

STICK TO THE LAB. YOU CAN BARELY GET A HANDLE ON WHAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU.