This is entirely a defeatist mentality. I don't think there is any evidence to show that neurochemistry causes determinism, which is essentially what you are suggesting.
But let's assume it is true (which I don't think it is). Is it mentally healthy to go around saying "well fuck it, I'm just this way because I was born this way".
I do believe you can change yourself. Neurochemistry definitely plays a role in your ability to (luck). But having this defeatist mentality means you'll never attempt it. I would even argue that this comment should hint at some evolutionary benefit of getting down trodden.
Exactly. I choose to believe I can control my own behavior, and that belief undeniably affects my actual behavior. Now some Determinist comes along and says I didn't really make that choice, it was destiny. Well, okay, whatever you say dude; but the fact that I believe it is still in play.
I don't see what the value in denying free will is. Fascinating sophomore debate? Yes. Gonna help you survive and thrive on this planet? No.
I agree with this. The question of free will existing or not is not an important question. An interesting one, but at the same time the answer isn't really meaningful.
If we find free will exists, well we continue with the way we have been going. If we find that it doesn't, well we don't change anything because we don't have free will. (Honestly I believe there is middle ground to this question. That some people can exert more free will than others but that you can also train this behavior. But that's another discussion. If this is true, I do find this a meaningful answer though)
I'm guessing a proof that a free will does not exist could lead to a collapse of civilization, as many people would just not feel accountable and responsible for their lives any more.
Individuals would survive, but everyone could excuse their own bad behaviour with "I'm not in charge of myself, it's not me who's making this decision to rob/rape/kill etc.", which would lead to decline of society and, eventually, civilization.
I want to know if I was always destined to find the idea of creatures in a supposedly deterministic universe worrying about whether free will exists to be hilariously funny?
So is the paradoxical idea of a person deciding that free will doesn't exist
There's also this Bertrand Russell quote:
"As against solipsism it is to be said, in the first place, that it is psychologically impossible to believe, and is rejected in fact even by those who mean to accept it. I once received a letter from an eminent logician, Mrs. Christine Ladd-Franklin, saying that she was a solipsist, and was surprised that there were no others. Coming from a logician and a solipsist, her surprise surprised me."
I feel like this is saying you're a Christian because religion is useful regardless of whether it's true. That's cool man, I'm not here to yuck your yum.
Sure, but all analogies are flawed. Yours is not as offensive to me as you might have hoped because I’m agnostic. But I can also flip it on its head:
The problem with religion comes when it’s used as a justification for horrible acts—just like one might use the lack of free will to justify horrible acts.
Sorry, I genuinely wasn't trying to offend you, though I can see why it came off that way. I just meant to convey I'm not on some mission to convince people of anything. If it's helpful or makes people feel good to believe in free will, that's good enough for me. Even if I were 100% sure of there was no robust free will, I wouldn't be interested in changing people's minds.
Or when dealing with heinous criminals. Imagining that if I were unlucky enough to be born with that DNA into that family in that location and lived those experiences I most likely would have committed the same terrible acts. So while I see value in perhaps protecting broader society from them by doing things like imprisoning them, I am less likely to dehumanize them. By random luck it was them and not me.
But if someone is just a monster who makes evil decisions, then they can simply be disposed of like trash. They aren't like me, I make good decisions.
Maybe you have abusive parents. If you can imagine that if you'd had exactly their DNA and life experiences, you too would be abusive. This is helpful in forgiving them, which is an important part of recovery. Protect yourself from future damage, but allow yourself to move on.
Of course in practical terms this means I find it useful to pretend as if I have free will but others do not.
I don't believe you can change much. You can force yourself to behave differently, but at a cost of extra effort and suffering.
Instead of personality change, I think the environment changes, and we express different psychological features depending on the situation. There are people/situations that bring out the best in us, and the opposite. Who we are depends on where we are, and with who we are interacting.
And of course with more experience comes less over-confidence. We change our values in light of our past experience.
Another thing is risk. The more you have to lose the less you want to risk it. When you have invested a lot in a family or career, you change your values in order to minimise risk.
So I think we are not changing our personality but it reflects differently because our situation has changed.
This realisation helped me forgive myself of the torture of changing my personality, instead I seek a situation where the better characteristics of my personality shine. I have always been myself even though externally I changed.
But let's assume it is true (which I don't think it is). Is it mentally healthy to go around saying "well fuck it, I'm just this way because I was born this way".
I do believe you can change yourself. Neurochemistry definitely plays a role in your ability to (luck). But having this defeatist mentality means you'll never attempt it. I would even argue that this comment should hint at some evolutionary benefit of getting down trodden.