>>17909013 (OP)
Determinism is a nonsensical concept
Here are three problems determinism utterly fails to address:
>1. Who is the Ultimate Determiner?
If everything is causal, then whence does the chain of causality begins? It must be an uncaused agent i.e. God but then God himself must possess free will to be uncaused, which defeats the point of determinism - if God is a cause of everything, then everything has a piece of God's Will aka free will.
>2. Who is the Illusion?
As a qualia, *I* feel unbound by physical laws. Thoughts, ideas, and emotions spark within my subjective consciousness without engaging on any detectable level with gravity, electromagnetism, quantum effects etc? A determinist would say that I'm deluded by the higher level of abstraction and all my thoughts can be reduced to electric impulses within the neurons. Yet, it leaves an open question - WHO is then fooled into believing that HE is a qualia? Only an entity with free will can be fooled at all, a deterministic computer would think in deterministic ways.
>3. Causal chain or causal chainlink or causal double dildo?
The stable, linear flow of time was already demonstrated to be false by Einstein. "Human perspective" is much too limited to make grand claims about the nature of everything, time itself is no more than our particular brains interpretation of outside reality. We can't sense time, we can't sense causality. Hume's ought argument points at a massive issue with determinism - a gun can fire and a bullet can fly yet the causality to link these two is not detectable. You can subdivide the actors of this causal drama - trigger causing the pin to move, pin hitting the primer etc etc yet all of these are just items in a causal link with no CAUSALITY itself to glue them together. You'd think that in deterministic universe the stuff of causality would be everywhere.
