• stravanasu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    As most who have already commented here, I’m somewhat unimpressed (and would expect more analytical subtlety from a scientist). Wittgenstein already fully dissected the notion of “free will”, showing its semantic variety of meanings and how at some depth it becomes vague and unclear. And Nietzsche discussed why “punishment” is necessary and makes sense even in a completely deterministic world… Sad that such insights are forgotten by many scientists. Often unclear if some scientists want to deepen our understanding of things, or just want sensationalism. Maybe a bit of both…

    • Umbrias@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Scientists can have opinions and beliefs. A news organization encouraging it as being a scientific conclusion only because it comes from a scientist is really the issue here.