I've been thinking hard recently.

A few days ago after reading his blog I asked Jeffery on Formspring what he thought about determinism. I first learnt about determinism a few months ago from watching Waking Life (which I found about from Roger) and the idea seemed so amazing to me that I've thought about it a lot ever since. I now know that what I thought was determinism could be more accurately described as deterministic fatalism. That sounds a bit complicated but you can basically summarise it as this: if the laws of nature precisely govern the behaviour of every little particle in the universe, then everything that ever happens in the future can only follow one set path.

I had difficulty getting my head around this idea. It's not so hard to imagine that things like the orbit of the Earth, the death of a star, the formation of a galaxy are all predetermined events brought on by pre-existing conditions. But it gets harder when you realise that our minds are also made of the same particles as anything else in the world. So everything we think about, everything we do is not guided by our free will but rather the Laws of Nature being carried out within the particles of our mind. It's such a drastic conclusion but I can't think of any way that it's not true.

Accepting this belief of determinism, it then becomes quite hard to contemplate the implications of it. Should we resign to the futility of human will and forgo responsibility for our decisions? Technically, you don't even get to make that decision because that's predetermined too. But in real life when you make a decision, it still feels like you're making a choice and that you're in control of what you're doing. Free will may be an illusion, but it's certainly a very good one. People seem to make decisions everyday that affect the course of their lives. Everybody still needs to be held accountable for their actions and their decisions if society is to function. It seems that for all discussion of ethics, politics and practical real world issues, a fatalistic viewpoint while logically valid, is quite dangerous for the attitude of defeatism it implies.

Perhaps more profound are the consequences of these beliefs on things like spirituality. When one imagines the universe and consequently everybody within it to simply be a jumble of particles forced to follow a set sequence of interactions then that leaves pretty much no room for concepts like the human soul. I think this is a different topic altogether but thinking about this made me realise that the attributes that make up what we believe to be the 'human soul' like our personalities, memories, thoughts and beliefs are really just a specific arrangement of neurons. These things that we believe to be immaterial and maybe even persistent after death are in fact physical things that exist within our skull and decompose when we die. For this reason, I believe that there is no afterlife.

Anyway, this post was initially intended to be just about my fatalistic beliefs but it diverged a bit at the end. The reason I wrote about this stuff is that Jeffery lent me his course book thing from the philosophy course he did last year on the module 'Time and Cause'. This was meant to be a kind of introduction about why I'm interested in philosophy before I started writing about what I thought about the book Jeffery lent me but it turned out quite long. I'm halfway through the book Jeffery lent me and I'll blog about it sometime soon. It's titled 'Time and Cause'.