Posted: Nov 27, 2016 4:52 pm
ughaibu wrote:Well, this is a matter of fact, not of opinion. So, what you think is irrelevant, and yet again, you are mistaken about one of the basics of the discussion.
I would disagree, in fact I already did and am happy to stick with what I said, but much more to the point, whichever of us is correct about what incompatibilism is or isn't is largely irrelevant to whether there is free will or not.
In fact, to a large extent, it is, furthermore, irrelevant (to the free will issue) which, if either, of compatibilism or incompatibilism is correct.
As I said before, the two teams on the pitch are not the compatibilists versus the incompatibilists, nor are they the determinists versus the free-willers. Unless the game is taking place in the false dichotomy championships.
You don't seem to be particularly keen to actually engage on the free will issue and answer my questions on it. To me, that looks like a somewhat trivial detour away from the main free will question; does it exist? You know, the question posed in the OP?