THE KNUCKLEHEAD
'
S GUIDE TO COVENANTAL THEOLOGY
27
which Hobbes's 'solution' was one manner of putting into focus,
another representation of exactly the same basic assumption we
continue to treat here is this:
Coherence
(a place for everything, and everything in its place)
|
|
Freedom
<- - Again, what goes here?
or this -- more along the lines of Hobbes's model:
Freedom
(Ones in `free' motion)
|
|
Coherence
(Leviathan)
<- - Same question.
To 'solve' the problem, of course, Hobbes snuck in an invisible
extra layer, the "laws" governing the Ones in motion:
"Laws" governing Ones in motion
|
|
Freedom
(Ones in `free' motion)
|
|
Coherence
(Leviathan)
<- - Again, how do you get from
inevitable "laws" governing human
behavior to "freedom"? Isn't "freedom"
then simply an illusion?
This is no dead issue: merely as one out of many, many possible
examples, cognitive scientist Mr. Steven Pinker
1
recently stated that,
since human behavior can now be seen (and be seen more and more) to
"fall out" of a few basic scientific laws, all rational (i.e., non-childish)
people must acknowledge that "free will" appears to be an illusion.
However much we may dislike this outcome, the existence of free will
appears to be totally unnecessary to a rational account of human
behavior, just as the idea that the earth is flat is totally unnecessary to
an account of the physical universe. (Those who dispute this are
welcome to do so, but they must do so in a grown-up way, by
following the rules of science -- otherwise, they are simply being
children, flat-earthers, quitting the game of being rational simply
because they don't like what rational inquiry has discovered).
1. In Pinker S (1997). How the mind works. New
York: Norton.
N.B. This is an html-ized copy of a page from the pdf file, The Knucklehead's Guide to Covenantal Theology.