The primary ethic and politic of determinism is authoritarianism. That is, once individual Will becomes merely an inexorable effect of a Singularity of Cause which decides all purpose, be it God, or Natural Law/Scientific Empiricism, Existence (what “is” as its own end, where “Existence” must necessarily subordinate all other definitions of all objects, rendering their distinctions moot), or Social/Cultural Construction, or any other garden variety ideal like the Common Good, the Underprivileged, etcetera etcetera, then man cannot by definition act purposefully, on his own, to any relevant, rational, or moral objective, regardless of how this objective may be defined. Thus, all knowledge and purpose can only be ascribed to some kind of transcendent (and rationally impossible) revelation according to those who proclaim themselves the ecclesiastical (ruling according to “spiritual” mandate) recipients of the “Wisdom” or “Truth” of the Great Cause (the Singularity of Cause). Examples of this can be found in religious leaders who claim divine rulership according to “God’s Calling”, the Representatives of States who claim to act on behalf of the “People” or the “Common Good”, or Intellectual elites who claim natural insight or acumen with respect to the “language of the Universe”, where the universe speaks in the arcane vernacular of mathematics, statistical analysis, genetic and evolutionary processes, various research methodologies, etcetera, etcetera. In all of these cases, Truth, and thus necessarily all that Is, is a function of an abstract ideal which causes absolutely, and therefore categorically determines all that man does, and thus, by definition, all that man thinks. Man then can only be compelled and controlled by force (violence), since he possesses no real capacity for self-awareness and therefore no capacity for self-control. He cannot think, therefore he cannot choose. And therefore he must be ruled–and absolutely so, by those who DO think, and DO know: those, again, who are the self-proclaimed extensions of the Determining (Singularity of) Cause. In other words, they rule you, because they are, as far as you are concerned, indistinguishable from that which determines you.
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
unreformingtheology 
Your proclamation is true Only within a singular and omnipotent ontology; which is to say, only where there is already a One reality, One possible universe or otherwise One unitive whole wherein all things lay in potenial.
My question would be: Can you make a choice out of your ability to choose? Can you choose to think a thought that you know is true, can you choose to know it is false?
Landzek, I’m not sure what any of that means. Are you suggesting there is more than one universe? Like the multiverse hypothesized by some physicists? And how could we possess a knowledge of a multiverse if other universes are utterly distinct…that is, mutually exclusive? And if they are not mutually exclusive then would they not be bound by a common context and would not that context then be the One Universe?
I don’t believe in potential; I don’t believe in probability. I believe in what Is. Potential and probability are abstractions. Like “future” and “blue”.
And “choice” a pretty big topic; not sure what you are getting at. I will say that it’s important to understand that choice and will are not the same thing. But again, I don’t really understand the question.
Causal inevitability is not a meaningful constraint. If you take a moment to think it through, you’ll discover that what you inevitably do is always exactly identical to you being you, doing what you do, and choosing what you choose. The idea that inevitability constrains you is a delusion.
Causal inevitability is not a meaningful constraint for the simple reason that it is impossible; a contradiction that self nullifies.
1. If something is inevitable, then there is no way to meaningfully define or make a distinction between it happening and it NOT happening.
2. Causal inevitability means that something IS even BEFORE it happens (according to the definition of inevitable), which of course renders the cause of whatever is inevitable moot, which means it is not caused and therefore cannot be inevitable.
“Causal inevitability” is a meaningless, irrational concept.