Questions about the free will debate

My apologies - you labeled yourself a compatibilist, and I mistakenly too this to indicate some level of knowledge on your part. Usually people don't pick that label until they have at least a basic understanding of the relevant terms. Since you don't, you should probably back up quite a bit and start with this FAQ post. You should probably also stop arguing with your friend: it is not a good idea to start arguing about things before you understand them.

I said “I THINK I’m arguing for something like Schopenhauer’s compatibilism.” From what I know about it, it seems to align the most with my current understanding of things. I’m not bound to it in any way, that’s why I’m trying to ask people that more about the subject than me to help me learn.

I guess it’s more of a discussion than a debate. How many philosophy tomes do I have to read before I’m allowed to talk about a subject? I learn things best by debating with people and finding out how I’m wrong. I adopt a position for the sake of argument and see where it goes. I shouldn’t have to “back out,” I’m not writing my doctoral thesis, I’m trying to engage in the process of learning.

All of it's stupid, but that's par for the course for someone new to this topic. If you would like to see how these questions you're bringing up have been addressed, you can attend either to my answers, to the things I linked, or both in conjunction.

Thanks for elaborating. Your haughty remarks have provided me with a great deal of mental clarity. I’m glad someone was able to explain to me how exactly I am conflating concepts and why my questions are off topic. You’ve been very helpful.

/r/askphilosophy Thread Parent