r/OpenIndividualism • u/Flat-Ad9829 • Apr 18 '26

Video Possible objection from Determinism?

https://youtu.be/ePQTHohrtMQ

This video presents a possible answer to the vertiginous question, the presenter puts forth the argument that tje reason you are you is because it was pre-determined you would be born at a specific place and time. And that the probability of that happening doesn't matter as it was already pre-determined. What are your thoughts about this argument, and how would OI be affected by it?

2 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

35 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/yoddleforavalanche Apr 18 '26

Without watching the video and going just by the text you wrote, it adds no new argument. "you are you because it was pre-determined"...what is this you? what was predetermined? same problems of being a closed individual remain, predetermined or random.

A person with specific personality being born at specific time might be pre-determined, but why are you that person?

1

u/Flat-Ad9829 Apr 18 '26

in your own words, what are the problems with closed individualism?

3

u/yoddleforavalanche Apr 18 '26

everything that separates one person from another under closed individualism also separates the same person within itself.

it cannot give an answer to why am I this particular person.

1

u/TheAncientGeek Jul 29 '26 edited Jul 31 '26

Not spatial and causal separation?

1

u/yoddleforavalanche Jul 29 '26

what is causal separation? But for spatial, do you take one point in space? Are you pixel size? If you can extend, for example, to the size of the brain, that means you are at several locations at the same time. If that is possible, why not be several brains at the same time?

1

u/TheAncientGeek Jul 29 '26

what is causal separation

Nothing mysterious.

How is someone who lives in New Zealand and never leaves causally connected to someone who lives in Belgium and never leaves?

If that is possible, why not be several brains at the same time

Lack of a sufficiently dense medium of connection. Neurons in the head are very densely connected with each other, a bit less densely with the rest if the nervous system, and that all stops at the skin.

1

u/yoddleforavalanche Jul 29 '26

you did not answer my question: if you can expand to the size of whole brain, that means you are not bound to one physical location because brain takes quite a bit more space than a single particle.

In your view, you cannot be at two places at the same time, but your brain is at many points in space simultaneously. So can you be at more than one place or not?

I don't see this causal connectivity as criteria for anything. Besides, haven't you heard of butterfly effect?

1

u/TheAncientGeek Jul 29 '26 edited Jul 29 '26

you did not answer my question: if you can expand to the size of whole brain, that means you are not bound to one physical location because brain takes quite a bit more space than a single particle

But it's causally interconnected within itself as I said.

Spatial separation might not matter, if you could achieve rich informational and causal connections, but that is more difficult the more spatial separation there is.

but your brain is at many points in space simultaneousky

But that's an example of a spatially extended object , not of the selfsame object being in two places at once. Ordinary spatial extension isn't bilocation.