I just tried to use m355 Copilot (premium) to recreate an old set of seminary lecture slides for me. The slides are far too detailed and content heavy, and I wanted something more accessible and presentation worthy.
It simply can't do it. The slides have 3 points max, no graphics, no diagrams, all white with black letters. My 8 year old does better slides for her elementary presentation on porpoises. Am I missing something?
Firstly, I am calling out reddit compatibilists here, not all compatibilists. If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it. However, if the shoe does fit, then you should really be policing your own because they are watering down actual compatibilism.
Here is how most of my conversations with reddit compatibilists go:
"Compatibilism fails because determinism demands 'x'."
At this point, the reddit compatibilist takes one of two positions.
Position 1) "Well, determinism doesn't have to be true in order for compatibilism to be true. Determinism can be false, but in a theoretical world where determinism was true, free will would still be compatible with it."
Please note that I agree this is logically true, and I am not debating this point. The problem, though, is that the reddit compatibilist just ran from determinism. They didn't defend determinism; they dodged my argument about 'x' by insisting that determinism didn't have to exist. Here is the deal, though. All of the teeth of compatibilism were just removed. It is now all bark with no bite. If determinism doesn't exist in reality, then compatiblism doesn't actually exist. It only theoretically exists if this theoretical determinism were to exist. It is now like a biologist debating about the intricacies of unicorns flying if they were actually to exist. It is the definition of an Ivory Tower Philosophy. Who cares? It doesn't have any meaningful impact on reality because it doesn't really exist. In addition, the compatibilist is still not defending actual determinism as compatible with free will.
Position 2) "Well, the individual can still deliberate and choose from a range of possibilities that were deterministically created."
The problem here is that this isn't determinism! This is just one of the many examples where reddit compatibilists stop defending actual determinism. They end up creating something that is just barely short of determinism and then call it determinism. The agent is still making choices of some kind, but as one reddit compatibilist said, "the agent is not being pushed around by choices." Meaning that nothing was causing them to choose a specific option. They were still the agent making the choice, but everything else was determined...... which isn't determinism. It is pointless to try and reiterate every single version of this non-determinism determinism that I have come across, but it all comes down to the same argument. At some point, the determinism is breaking down so that at least one thing is not being caused, forced, or coerced by antecedent conditions, and thus it is not actual determinism.
So my argument is simply this. If reddit compatibilists can get on the same page as actual compatibilists, then the debate on this subreddit can be a heck of a lot less confusing. They need to stop running away from determinism. The whole point of compatibilism is that the compatibilist bites the bullet of determinism and explains how it is actually compatible with free will. Without determinism there is no actual compatibilism.