>it's not our fault
>just let the wind carry you
You know, not having free will isn't all that bad
Imagine all of the fuckups that could come with being truly free

>mfw you were given one life
>mfw you're a stumpy rat on 4chan posting babbys first troll

>>24375944
People behave more impulsively when they hear that

>>24375961
>no free will equals no responsability
A wild retard has appeared.

>>24375987
dumb people behave more impulsively when they hear that*
fify

>>24375991
Responsibility becomes an illusion, my friend, because any one thing any other person/thing may be responsible for can be traced back to another cause to the effect, in an infinite chain reaching back to the creation of time itself

There actually, really is no real responsibility. We're making this shit up.

>>24375944
Never trust crypto-jews like Sam Harris. He just wants to steer christians away from god because thats his job, to advance jewry and their power.

>>24376134
>there's actual no real responsibility
That's because you equate responsibility to cause. You're responsible for your own life, even though you're not the cause of it, just as a manager is responsible for a company, even though he didn't create it.
Responsibility is atributed to individuals over certain events, through consensus. It's not a matter of causality.

>>24376411
>just as a manager is responsible for a company
He isn't actually, though
He just thinks he is and therefore behaves as if he is
He is not at fault for the company, which is exactly what I said in my first post: no one is truly at fault for anything

I think you're mixing up your definition of responsibility with my definition of fault

If by responsibility you mean being inextricably tethered to an effect despite not being the cause of an effect, then yes you are right. But this fits more in line with being along for the ride than to be at fault for something. To be at fault for something you have to be its cause, that's inherent to its definition. My point is that the effect one is at fault for can always be forgiven, as there is another cause outside that person's control that caused them to cause the effect in question.

I think you just accidentally strawmanned me.

>>24376500
>I think you just accidentally strawmanned me
No, I didn't.
You used the word responsibility in your initial argument. In no moment you used fault. Pick a dictionary and see what responsibility means. You'll see your notion of responsibility being eliminated by causality falls flat right away.

>>24376577
See >>24375961
You were the one who swooped in and called me a retard by mislabeling what I said
I was using the word responsibility synonymously with the word fault that I used in my original post
I explained the thought process behind my post
That is all

>>24376630
>>24376577
adj.
Liable to be required to give account, as of one's actions or of the discharge of a duty or trust.
adj.
Involving personal accountability or ability to act without guidance or superior authority: a responsible position within the firm.
adj.
Being a source or cause.


See third definition, specifically
We're literally just arguing semantics

>mfw retards like him think determinism = you have no choice over your future and what you do

>>24376676
So there's more than one determinism?

>>24376676
You don't, really.
I mean, you do have choice, quite clearly, but it is just another mechanical process
Unless there's something metaphysical to will.
Any choice you make is just the compounding of circumstances and events
I think that's the point of determinism

Now that doesn't mean you should stop making choices, or that you should not stop making choices either. Do what you will, it's the way you were built.