Sunday, June 15, 2014

Who Decides? You Or Your Lizard Brain?

The Belgian philosopher of ethics *LOL* Jan Verplaetse is trying to prove by the case of the Dendermonde Nursery Attack that free will does not exist.

DNA related doctrines are the peasant variety of biochemical determinism - some call it simply racism - but in this postmodern era countless other forms of predestination  based on evolutionary, biochemical processes in endocrinology and neurology, have come the light. These are the basis for Verplaetse's rationalistic 'theorum'. 

In short, according to Verplaetse et al. we may believe we are taking rational decisions, but this is merely a trick of the mind: what actually happens is that subconsciously our prehistoric brain parts are taking our decisions for us. At first sight this seems to be a latter day form of old wives' tales. But at second glance, it's a mental nuke!

These pseudo scientific rationalisms are a direct attack on free will. But the ultimate goal is the destruction of morality. Morals are closely correlated to responsibility and free will. A decision not taken free of choice, finds itself outside the realm of ethics. 

But because there are moral and immoral people, morality causes inequality. That doesn't suit the ideal of egalitarianism at all. So morality has been equivocated with vice and mores. Which rendered morality socially determined. It also made morality not just a collective trait, it also made it group subjective and therefore relative, as each 'group' sets its own ethical norms.

The belief in determinism is but a small step for rationalists, because their philosophy is rooted in the fallacy of a priori, innate knowledge: the human brain isn't a computer that processes external information, but a vat full of knowledge that is already in place at birth and is determined by race, culture, ethnicity, talent, brain quality, hormones or any other variation on this theme. All we have to do to attain knowledge is to 'tap' into ourselves.

These variations on biochemical determinism are in fact one and the same fallacy that can easily be debunked by some rational thinking: the fact that a human being can choose not to believe in free, proves its very existence. 

Moreover, if you did not have a free will, we would never know anything for certain. A human being is fallible. Therefore he must be able to spot mistakes and correct them. This wouldn't be possible if you can't tell right from wrong.

And that is exactly what nihilistic skeptics hold! Men is incapable of knowing anything, in their view. But that is denying the objective truth of science. Scientists cannot deny free will without denouncing the field of science at the same time.

The denial of free will is part of the war Kantian Nihilists are waging against reason and reality. That war is necessary because inequality is an integral part of the real world. And that's an unfairness which is unacceptable to the egalitarian ideal.

But, is our recent analysis of egalitarianism has shown, the root of of the philosophical movement is moral Nihilism. Only at birth and in death are all men equal. As it is impossible to lift the bottom up (you can't get what you don't have), the only solution is to bring the top down.

What would remain of humanity is a world of ghosts, inhabited by zombies. Soulless, human bodies without the idiosyncrasies that distinguishes one person from the next. This is the Utopian world view that egalitarians have in mind for us.

Keep that in mind next time when a rationalist claims to be able to scientifically prove human beings are the sum total of our own biochemical processen, of worse, that these are taking our decisions for us.

Source (Flemish)