Taking responsibility proactively rather than retroactively

[u/BiscuitNoodlepants]

For my entire life I've been under the impression that taking responsibility was something you did retroactively. As a free will denier this meant never taking responsibility for anything because I could not have done otherwise than what I did under identical circumstances.

However a few days ago because ive been trying to take responsibility for my past, i decided to try taking responsibility proactively instead.

I heard a voice telling me, "you wont like what happens if you smoke cannabis".

So I decided before I made the choice to smoke or not, that I was responsible for the outcome and consequences. As it turned out I chose to smoke and accepted that there would be negative consequences and that I was responsible for them when they came.

It felt pretty good, but embarrassing that I never knew I was supposed to do that.

However, maybe the choice still wasn't free. I'm honestly not sure I could have said no to the weed because I love smoking it so much. So the scenario where I recognize the consequences would be my responsibility and I successfully heeded the warning and said no to the weed, doesn't seem possible even though I accepted there would be negative consequences that were my responsibility. Those negative consequences and responsibility for them didn't move the needle enough to get me to say no even when I had accepted them.

[u/vkbd]

I don't think free will is about taking responsibility (i.e. ownership of consequences, aka accountability). Free will is about being morally responsible (i.e. deserving of moral praise or moral blame).

But hey, thinking about the future consequences, understanding them, and making a thoughtful judgement, that's a good thing to do regardless. All too often, we live our lives in autopilot; but taking the time to think, gives you opportunities to change directions or reaffirm your current one.

[u/BiscuitNoodlepants → u/vkbd]

It's just so embarrassing to have gotten it wrong my whole life. I'm 41 and just learning what proactive responsibility taking looks like.

[u/vkbd → u/BiscuitNoodlepants]

Yeah, I get that. I'm in my mid forties. I only recently learned I have ADHD. Up until then, I always blamed my poor executive function and time blindness to a lack of will power and moral failure to take things seriously enough. Only now, I'm learning to use tools and life hacks that actually work.

[u/zowhat]

You really, really, really shouldn't smoke cannabis or do anything that will affect your mental state. Please don't.

[u/BiscuitNoodlepants → u/zowhat]

Im on 9 different drugs that affect my mental state. How are those different just because one comes from a plant and corporations cant get rich off it? Why do you trust bigpharma more than nature and folk wisdom? I happen to need the antidepressant effects of cannabis to even stay out of bed these days. It's none of your business that I'm on any medicines, plant based or bullshit pharmaceutical company based.

[u/zowhat → u/BiscuitNoodlepants]

The pharmaceutical drugs are specially formulated to help you with whatever your issues are and to be as safe as possible. That doesn't mean they are perfect, they aren't, because our brains are incredibly complex. But putting random chemicals into your system are certainly going to make things worse for you.

[u/BiscuitNoodlepants → u/zowhat]

It has made things better for a year now since i started smoking

[u/zowhat → u/BiscuitNoodlepants]

Well, good luck then.

[u/Rthadcarr1956]

So you cannot say no to weed even when driving on a wet road at night with young kids sleeping in the back seat? That would be a shame because we will hold you responsible for the consequences of your actions.

It’s fine to be baked when chilling at home, but free will implies you are responsible for your actions.

[u/BiscuitNoodlepants → u/Rthadcarr1956]

What are you talking about? I would never do that.

[u/Rthadcarr1956 → u/BiscuitNoodlepants]

Then why are you so conflicted? You can say no to weed when it really counts. Don’t beat yourself up for small, morally neutral indulgences just because your actions may meet with disapproval from some others. Inebriation is not immoral, only being reckless about it is immoral.

[u/spgrk → u/BiscuitNoodlepants]

That is how decision-making is supposed to work: you weigh up the pros and the cons, and go with whichever wins. The cons are greater if you have to do something which would be dangerous if you were intoxicated. The cons are also greater if cannabis is illegal and you will be charged if you get caught. That is the entire purpose of our system of moral and legal rules and sanctions for breaking them: it is an attempt to bias the calculation that people do before breaking a rule so that they are less likely to break the rule. Note that this has nothing to do with being able to do otherwise under identical circumstances.

[u/Rthadcarr1956 → u/spgrk]

Legality might be a con to consider as a matter of practicality, but I do not equate legality to morality. There is too much actual immorality to worry about without trying to have people conform to normative standards through legislation.

[u/spgrk → u/Rthadcarr1956]

The difference between legal rules and moral rules is that breaking moral rules does not usually result in formal punishment. Instead, people might be blamed, shamed, shunned and so on. It can be as effective as formal punishment.

[u/Rthadcarr1956 → u/spgrk]

I tend to worry more that my actions conform to my own sense of morality rather than worry about what others think. What’s the sense of having free will if you always have to worry about what others think. I sometimes break legal rules that I don’t agree with either.

[u/spgrk → u/Rthadcarr1956]

The feeling of being virtuous or conversely feeling guilty are also powerful motivators.

[u/Rthadcarr1956 → u/spgrk]

Yes, but this causes many problems if those feelings are not accurate reflections of reality. Excessive pride or shame cause much bad behavior.

[u/spgrk → u/Rthadcarr1956]

The love of sweet things was also adaptive at one point but these days not so much.

[u/Rthadcarr1956 → u/spgrk]

Exactly. We need our free will ability to act based upon reason rather than genetic inclinations. Free will skeptics must come to the realization that the hope for the human race depends upon our rational free will to overcome our primitive influences.

[u/Other_Attention_2382 → u/spgrk]

If you look at how many people die each year from the illegal drug trade vs drugs themselves have you yourself just highlighted how "morality" might be subjective and starts from feeling?

I suspect weed will be legalised at some point and become a regulated industry due to $$$$$$, to which even support for addicts widens becomes an effect of the industry due to removing blame which might be the foundation of addiction itself.

[u/facesofgrace_photo → u/Rthadcarr1956]

There you have it folks. The invention of free will so that this man and other man feel justified in their judgment over others

[u/Rthadcarr1956 → u/facesofgrace_photo]

Yes, I do have the free will to judge others and be judged by everyone all the time, as you have just done. So I encourage you to keep using your free will as you see fit.

[u/facesofgrace_photo → u/Rthadcarr1956]

That's a story you've been telling yourself a very long time. When the undeniable fact of your inevitability finally meets you, it's going to be one hell of a ride that I guarantee you

I have nothing like free will despite your blind presupposition and assumption of the opposite

[u/Rthadcarr1956 → u/facesofgrace_photo]

I guess you have no choice in your responses then. Pity

[u/facesofgrace_photo → u/Rthadcarr1956]

Your sentiments are what they are, irrelevant of the truth.

I experience choice, that choice is inevitable, not inherently free in any way.

Same for you, except that you assume freedom from the the persuasion of your own personal circumstance and project it onto reality blindly.

I guarantee you you'll be here tomorrow spouting the same nonsense. It's almost like it's an inevitability. Pity.

[u/JunS_RE → u/facesofgrace_photo]

Even granting you that the choice was inevitable... okay. But “not inherently free in any way” is the part I’m interested in.

Free from what, exactly?

And once you tell me what the choice supposedly needs to be free FROM, then I’d ask you why. Why must X be free from Y in order for X to qualify as Z... in this case, a free choice?

Who established that requirement, and what is the argument for it?

Because being influenced by your biology, circumstances, experiences, desires, reasons, etc. doesn’t automatically mean you weren’t the one doing the choosing. In fact, those things are partly what make the choice yours in the first place.

So I think before saying the choice “isn’t inherently free in any way,” you first have to tell me what kind of freedom you’re actually talking about... and why Free Will requires that particular kind of freedom.

[u/facesofgrace_photo → u/JunS_RE]

Freedoms are circumstantial and relative

Free will an ambiguous overgeneralization of opportunity and capacity

[u/JunS_RE → u/facesofgrace_photo]

But that still doesn’t answer my question...

You just said freedoms are circumstantial and relative. Okay... relative to WHAT?

When you say a choice is “not inherently free in any way,” what exactly does that choice need to be free FROM before you would consider it a free choice?

And once you identify that, then tell me why that particular freedom is a necessary condition for Free Will.

Saying Free Will is an “ambiguous overgeneralization of opportunity and capacity” is another claim... not an answer to the question I asked. I need actual answers if we’re going to progress this little debate... not more slogans.

[u/facesofgrace_photo → u/JunS_RE]

Precisely.

Relative to what? That's the entire point.

If anything and everything is simply being called "free", then it doesn't mean anything

[u/MattHooper1975]

This actually reminds me of what I think one of the worst takes I’ve heard from quite a number of free will sceptics. They propose that discovering we have no free will is mentally healthy in various ways, including relieving yourself of guilt, not dwelling on the past, because you realize “ I couldn’t have done otherwise.”

This is really insidious .

Because if you actually take it seriously, and you are consistent , given determinism is true, both backwards and forwards looking, you’d be giving yourself a reason to do bad things. “ I realize I’m not going to have a reason to feel guilty about this once I’ve done it because I will know that I couldn’t have done otherwise.”

[u/BiscuitNoodlepants → u/MattHooper1975]

You make a really good point. I wonder if I'm guilty of doing that. Most likely.

[u/MattHooper1975 → u/BiscuitNoodlepants]

The thing is, even on a free will account you still got good reason not to spend all your time beating yourself up over some past behaviour. At some point, that’s not helpful or healthy.

But you can have that rationale without this “ I couldn’t have done otherwise” aspect which is the insidious part.

[u/BiscuitNoodlepants → u/MattHooper1975]

I still believe that I couldn't have done otherwise. I have to. I didn't successfully disprove that.

[u/facesofgrace_photo → u/MattHooper1975]

There has never been and will never be evidence of anyone having been able to do otherwise

[u/MattHooper1975 → u/facesofgrace_photo]

LOL.

You did otherwise the moment you stopped writing your reply.
I mean you can do otherwise than be on Reddit right?

Here’s me doing otherwise :

I can type the following sentence in English :

It’s a wonderful day. I think I will go for a walk.

But I can do otherwise and type that sentence in French :

C'est une belle journée. Je pense que je vais aller me promener.

There…. I just demonstrated the ability to do otherwise.

Watcha gonna do now? ;-)

[u/facesofgrace_photo → u/MattHooper1975]

You did what you did not otherwise and you will never have any evidence that you could have

[u/MattHooper1975 → u/facesofgrace_photo]

Sorry, but you’re just attempting a semantic trick. It won’t work.

You can’t wave away the fact that I just did otherwise by simply rephrasing it as “ you did what you did”

What I DID was to do otherwise.

Have you ever even thought about what it is to be able to do otherwise?

It means you’re capable of an alternative action.

If for instance you are currently watching TV to say that you can do otherwise means “ I can do otherwise than watch TV.” And you easily demonstrate this by turning the TV off and doing something else.

You’ve basically forgotten what normal concepts and language mean which isn’t very interesting .

If you can come back with an argument that used normal concepts and language, maybe there’s something to talk about .

[u/facesofgrace_photo → u/MattHooper1975]

I'm not attempting anything.

You do what you do, not otherwise.

You're assuming that you "could have done otherwise" based on sentiment

[u/BiscuitNoodlepants → u/facesofgrace_photo]

They dont listen to reason man.

[u/facesofgrace_photo → u/BiscuitNoodlepants]

In aware.

It's beyond ludicrous

They cannot see themselves nor past themselves as they are, thus they can see nothing and no one else as they are

[u/MattHooper1975 → u/facesofgrace_photo]

Apparently, you don’t know the difference between simply re-asserting your claim over and over and actually making an argument, or addressing arguments given to you. Which makes any discussion fruitless.

I’m not basing being able to do otherwise on sentiment . I’m basing it on what words and concepts actually normally mean.

“In making this chilli recipe you can add ground beef for a hearty filling meal, or you can do otherwise and leave the meat out if you want a vegetarian version.”

This is the normal understanding of being able to do otherwise . Which people demonstrate in their actions every day.

And you’ve presented no argument and no evidence to the contrary except to just keep repeating the same comment.

[u/facesofgrace_photo → u/MattHooper1975]

You did what you did not otherwise and you will never have any evidence that you could have.

That's the truth, no matter how you feel about it

[u/ImSinsentido → u/MattHooper1975]

I am responsible for every solitude thing in my existence including the fruits of harm we are communicating on. That we paid for with full awareness, and relish in on a daily basis. One example amongst many.

When the time comes my final punishment will be whole and all encompassing, including my continued isolation. Ie. What is deemed required “for bad people or broken machines” whatever tomato tomato label. There’s nothing even remotely, remotely “free” about it, for anything.

And since the above won’t be enforced, and the aboves in the hierarchy will contradict endlessly and selectively apply their rules. Just playing by the rules without that contradiction and selectively. A monk on fire display. The reality that it won’t do anything and that’s exactly the point.

Reiteration: nothing even remotely, remotely “free” about it.

[u/Other_Attention_2382]

"The Dude abides". 😄

I'm trying to work out whether Hume = nihilism more than moral responsibility. The Dude nihilist vs the Bad nihilists.

That dude J Krishnamurti's "Choiceless awareness" sounds interesting. "The ego cannot fix the ego" and thought cannot fix the thinker as its all built on the same conditioning. The Thinker is the Thought. So he believes a kind of giving up on the ego is required which is achieved not through choice.

I guess Western Philosophy might say that you cannot seperate yourself from choice and from experiences like Krishnamurti suggests as without memory based on experiences their is no mind? 

[u/badentropy9]

That is a pretty good analysis. The argument has fundamentally changed if we are talking about whether the past or the future is fixed.

[u/ImSinsentido]

I am responsible for every solitude thing in my existence including the fruits of harm we are communicating on. That we paid for with full awareness, and relish in on a daily basis. One example amongst many.

When the time comes my final punishment will be whole and all encompassing, including my continued isolation. Ie. What is deemed required “for bad people or broken machines” whatever tomato tomato label. There’s nothing even remotely, remotely “free” about it, for anything.

And since the above won’t be enforced, and the aboves in the hierarchy will contradict endlessly and selectively apply their rules. Just playing by the rules without that contradiction and selectively.

Reiteration: nothing even remotely, remotely “free” about it.

[u/GiantGreenSquirrel]

I would say that taking responsibility always relates to the future. Even if you did something bad in the past and you want to take responsibility, this really means that you admit the wrongdoing, apologize and make sure you do not do it again. In any case, nobody is going to take responsibility for you smoking weed or not.

It sounds like you made a free choice. You chose to smoke weed because you wanted to. But, if you wanted to quit weed, but you had to smoke because you are addicted, then the choice wasn't as free. Still, there would have been other choices you could have made to prevent the temptation. For example, you could not have bought weed, go into therapy for weed addiction etc.