MaxChaplin t1_j99fx5g wrote on February 20, 2023 at 7:03 AM

Reply to comment by frogandbanjo in Compatibilism is supported by deep intuitions about responsibility and control. It can also feel "obviously" wrong and absurd. Slavoj Žižek's commentary can help us navigate the intuitive standoff. by matthewharlow

Then the calculator's functionality is not isomorphic to arithmetic, and only the physical explanation is true.

frogandbanjo t1_j9czlnh wrote on February 21, 2023 at 12:39 AM

So there's something special about calculators that produce correct answers using virtually indistinguishable physical processes from calculators that produce incorrect answers.

Explain what significance that "higher level" actually has when we're trying to figure out what's going in the real, physical world.

Before you do, you might want to remember that analogies relying upon things that everybody already concedes are true are weak and shady.

Maybe you should think about two calculators that give two different answers to a math problem that absolutely nobody and nothing knows the correct answer to - and, possibly, can never.

MaxChaplin t1_j9ec2i7 wrote on February 21, 2023 at 8:15 AM

The higher level doesn't need to be able to explain the physical level in order to be useful. If substrate independence applies, it really is unable to. A calculator built correctly is like a window into the platonic world of arithmetics.

The analogy doesn't decisively prove that people have free will. It's point is to show that determinism doesn't contradict it.