Philosophy homework - need to support predefined future

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the philosophical concept of determinism and the idea that the future is predefined. Participants explore arguments and examples that could support this notion, particularly in relation to scientific principles and logical reasoning.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Philosophical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the predictability of chemical reactions implies that human thoughts and actions are also predetermined by the laws of physics and chemistry.
  • Another participant introduces the logical structure of modus ponens as a valid argument form, proposing that if its premises are true, it can be used to argue for a deterministic future.
  • A different participant questions the nature of proof in this context, suggesting that proof can be subjective and offering an example involving a dropped match to illustrate a fixed future.
  • One participant presents a timeline model to argue that while future events may seem unpredictable, they are ultimately defined by preceding events, thus supporting the idea of a predetermined future.
  • Another participant notes the complexity of the topic, indicating that there may not be a singular answer to the question of determinism and referencing the 'problem of induction' as a potential roadblock in the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on determinism, with no consensus reached. Some argue in favor of the idea that the future is predefined, while others raise questions about the nature of proof and the implications of philosophical arguments.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of the topic and the potential limitations of their arguments, particularly in relation to philosophical concepts and the problem of induction.

JPC
Messages
204
Reaction score
1
hey

To a lot of us it sounds evident that the future is predefined, that we know the future will only be one way, even through we cannot really predict how it would be (infinitely long equations, ect, an infinity of variables).

Ok, its logic , but i need to find clear arguments to support that idea

i was thinking of :

- example : we can predict with enough precision what will happen in a chemical reaction, and there's chemical reactions in our brains too (and other reactions) , and since we obey to the laws of physics and chemistry, our thoughts are predefined : we may think we are acting on our own , and that we did not do what fate expected us to do, but it was already predefined that we would think that;ect)

Ok that was just an example , how do i make a theory out of this ?

No very complicated philosophy language, ect please, I am in 12th grade in french school , scientific section (yes , in france you have to do philosophy in scientific section)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
JPC said:
hey

To a lot of us it sounds evident that the future is predefined, that we know the future will only be one way, even through we cannot really predict how it would be (infinitely long equations, ect, an infinity of variables).

Ok, its logic , but i need to find clear arguments to support that idea

i was thinking of :

- example : we can predict with enough precision what will happen in a chemical reaction, and there's chemical reactions in our brains too (and other reactions) , and since we obey to the laws of physics and chemistry, our thoughts are predefined : we may think we are acting on our own , and that we did not do what fate expected us to do, but it was already predefined that we would think that;ect)

Ok that was just an example , how do i make a theory out of this ?

No very complicated philosophy language, ect please, I am in 12th grade in french school , scientific section (yes , in france you have to do philosophy in scientific section)


Determinism
 
yes but which arguments can i put ?
 
Modus Ponens
If P, then Q
P
Therefore, Q

If the argument is modus ponens and its premises are true, then it is sound.
The premises are true.
Therefore, it is a sound argument.

If modus ponens is a sound argument, then it has been tested valid.
If valid, then it works to define future events.
Modus ponens is a sound argument.
Therfore it works to define future events.

That was a multiple modus ponens. I think you can add to this if necessary if it is deemed worthy.

Of course in the areas described best in quantum terms forget about ponens.

Modus ponens works in the everyday world.
 
never heard of this

it sounds logic, but what's the proof ?
 
Proof is sometimes a fuzzy thing. What do you mean by "proof?" I can use modus ponens and say:
If I can draw a circle that a match falls within when dropped from certain place 1 inch above the center of the circle, then I have demonstrated that the future is fixed.
I've dropped that match and it always has fallen in the 30 foot diameter circle.
Therefore the future is fixed.
 
JoeDawg said:
Determinism

One could argue this -- let the following line A->B be some time line of events, with X, Y and Z being specific points in the time line:

A--------------------------------------------------->B
*******X**************Y***********Z*******

If you are at X, then Y is in the future and cannot be predicted. However, for any "Y" it is possible to argue that the events from X to Y are perfectly defined, since they are in the past and actually happened, leading to Y. Therefore once you reach Y, you can argue that events leading up to and causing it are predefined, since they obviously already happened.

Any point on the time line can be viewed as either past or future, depending on which point you pick to observe it from.

One can argue that the time line could be split into infinite futures. The reply to this could be that while this may be true, any future you pick to examine would then be (pre) defined by the time line that leads to it.

Your teacher may or may not buy this.
 
JoeDawg said:
Determinism

There isn't going to be anyone answer to this.

With regards to philosophy, you'll find all sorts of stuff on determinism, check on wikipedia for instance.
Where you're probably going to come to a road block is with the 'problem of induction'.
And I'm thinking that's the real point of this homework.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
16K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
736
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K