Just one question you may "not want to hear": if, as you assert "there is no room for free will,", then what exactly is the point of your article? Aren't you trying to *convince* us of some alleged truth? If so, are we not to reason about it and, ahem, make a choice... and doesn't this presuppose free will? (Maybe you're a disciple of Alexander Rosenberg who argues--in writing--that we really, actually do *not* think!) That is, by simply writing this article you appeal to the very thing you decry--neither a sign of intellectual consistency (i.e., you're promoting a fallacy) nor intellectual maturity (you're serving your own personal, subjective and emotional desires).

My suggestion is you take a solid course in traditional logic and *actually* make the effort to deeply reflect on the notion that "There are more things in heaven and earth, [Ella], than are dreamt of in your [disordered] philosophy."

Why? Let me count the ways: in your article you do *nothing* to provide your personal definition of free will. Yet, isn't the correct approach to pose your opponent's position in the best possible light and then to provide reasoned, verifiable arguments against it? You're practicing bulverism: a rhetorical approach (and fallacy) that combines circular reasoning with presumption: assume your opponent is wrong, and explain their error.

I realize that's something "don't want to hear"... but if intellectual integrity is to be served then you need to take some of your own medicine: "for some people it is important to onto the idea [of no free will] nonetheless. The problem, of course, is the word "important" loses all meaning if there is no free will.

I could go on with other examples of nonsense you've attempted to foist condescendingly upon your readers. However, one in particular stands out. You cite the Benjamin Libet experiment, claiming it's "controversial". Really... just "controversial"? Clearly, you've not done your homework. If you had, you would have found out his work was debunked: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/09/free-will-bereitschaftspotential/597736/

--

--

--

Catholic, Aristotelian-Thomist, Ukrainian, nuclear engineer, physicist, philosopher of nature, husband, father, grandfather, teacher, classical music, athletics

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Alexander Sich

Alexander Sich

Catholic, Aristotelian-Thomist, Ukrainian, nuclear engineer, physicist, philosopher of nature, husband, father, grandfather, teacher, classical music, athletics

More from Medium

We’re All Parasites

Playfulness is Impact

“The [Mask] Must Go On!” A Theoretical Look at the Future of America’s Workforce.

Suspending Time with ‘The Profound M’