D&D General I really LOVE Stomping Goblins

[Filthy Lucre]

~Glances at degree~

Go off then.

Sure - hit me up with some of your work on the subject - you can DM me.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

The coherent definition of free will and whether humans actually have it are among the biggest questions in philosophy so I am somewhat sceptical about the ability of this forum to answer them.

You should be skeptical of this forums ability to even discuss the subject intelligently.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I don't think that's what he was going for (although I could certainly be wrong and have no relevant formal training).

It's the end point of his argument.

Basically, you have a program that say searches estores for items, finds the best price and buys it. It is making a choice.

Free will would be the ability, however unlikely, to decide not to do any of that on its own; being able to make theoretical any choice.

That's why people in oppressively regimes or under coercion are stripped of agency, not free will.

 

[Reynard]

Now that the philosophy tangent is played out -- sorry about that -- let's talk about YOUR favorite stock enemies.

Some folks have mentioned undead and infernals, others bandits and cultists types. For my part, if it isn't goblins, it has to be any Nazi analog.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

Basically, you have a program that say searches estores for items, finds the best price and buys it. It is making a choice.

Free will would be the ability, however unlikely, to decide not to do any of that on its own; being able to make theoretical any choice.

Unless the program can do otherwise given the exact same initial conditions, no, that is not making a choice. Causing something to happen is not, in and of itself, a choice.

No contemporary philosopher of mind would endorse that free will requires someone to be able to make ANY choice that is conceptually possible. You consistently display that you don't actually have any real knowledge of this subject.

The problem is you don't even know what you don't know about this.

 

[Maxperson]

Could you go into why it is harder? Does not the "rabid dog" analogy come in to simplify your choice?

I don't think it does come in. These aren't dogs, but sentient beings. It's like capturing a sociopathic/psychopathic serial killer. You don't get to just shoot him in the head, despite how evil he is. You might want to and it would certainly make things easier, but the moral thing to do is bring him in for justice. In the case of a race that is inherently evil, they're all just like that serial killer. While they're trying to kill you if you kill them in self-defense that's fine. If you capture one to question, though, the moral thing to do is bring him back for justice, not carry out a vigilante murder. It's harder to bring yourself to do that, though, than to bring in someone who might not even be evil, but was just on the other side of the conflict.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Sure - hit me up with some of your work on the subject - you can DM me.

Why would I do this? I hardly think the addition of privacy and the reduction of moderation is going to improve this discourse.

 

[Mirtek]

Not sure what you mean? But....
1) I've seen enough scenes where the protagonists had a massive shootout with special ops, etc. without even flinching. Not a single time can I recall -- in a scene like that -- where the protagonist on-screen at least went through the motions of questioning their actions
2) OK we don't know 100% if innocent people died or were maimed in those car chases. But the protagonist doesn't know that either. It's still manslaughter if it did come to pass that way. Probability of that happening doesn't seem negligible to me.

A lot get's glances over due to generally unrealistic "hollywood durability". Take this scene

Yeah, he doesn't "kill" anybody, because he's not biting the head off of the last one. Sure, none of those poor humans that were thrown 10+ meters in the air and against stone walls and hit with force strong enough to shatter this walls were killed. They're all just sleeping, they'll wake soon with just a few bruises

 

[Thunder Brother]

What's the internet equivalent of "take it outside you two"? Asking for a friend.

 

[Maxperson]

I mean, plenty of media has disposable mooks that can be destroyed by the heroes, but is there really any daylight between goblins and Stormtroopers insofar as they are raised from infancy to be Evil and only a few ever break the cycle (Finn for example)? Isn't blowing up a battle station of them basically an evil act? (Lord knows how many other Finns got destroyed by Luke in A New Hope)

Blowing up a battle station that can be stopped no other way and that already destroyed one planet full of innocents? It might not have been a good act, but it wasn't an evil one.