A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Incompatibilism and the garden of forking paths
Let (leeway) incompatibilism be the thesis that causal determinism is incompatible with the freedom to do otherwise. Several prominent authors have claimed that incompatibilism alone can capture, or at least best captures, the intuitive appeal behind Jorge Luis Borges's famous “Garden of Forking Paths” metaphor. The thought, briefly, is this: the “single path” leading up to one's present decision represents the past; the forking paths that one must decide between represent those possible futures consistent with the past and the laws of nature. But if determinism is true, there is only one possible future consistent with the past and the laws and, hence, only one path to choose from. That is, if determinism is true, then we are not free to do otherwise. In this paper, I argue that this understanding of the Garden of Forking Paths faces a number of problems and ought to be rejected even by incompatibilists. I then present an alternative understanding that not only avoids these problems but still supports incompatibilism. Finally, I consider how various versions of (leeway) compatibilism fit with the Garden of Forking Paths as well as the broader question of whether metaphors, however intuitive, have any dialectical force in the debates over freedom.
Incompatibilism and the garden of forking paths
Let (leeway) incompatibilism be the thesis that causal determinism is incompatible with the freedom to do otherwise. Several prominent authors have claimed that incompatibilism alone can capture, or at least best captures, the intuitive appeal behind Jorge Luis Borges's famous “Garden of Forking Paths” metaphor. The thought, briefly, is this: the “single path” leading up to one's present decision represents the past; the forking paths that one must decide between represent those possible futures consistent with the past and the laws of nature. But if determinism is true, there is only one possible future consistent with the past and the laws and, hence, only one path to choose from. That is, if determinism is true, then we are not free to do otherwise. In this paper, I argue that this understanding of the Garden of Forking Paths faces a number of problems and ought to be rejected even by incompatibilists. I then present an alternative understanding that not only avoids these problems but still supports incompatibilism. Finally, I consider how various versions of (leeway) compatibilism fit with the Garden of Forking Paths as well as the broader question of whether metaphors, however intuitive, have any dialectical force in the debates over freedom.
Incompatibilism and the garden of forking paths
Law, Andrew (author)
2023-01-01
Philosophical Issues 33 (2023), Nr. 1 ; Philosophical Issues
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
The Garden of Forking Paths, Santiago, Chile
British Library Online Contents | 2016
The Machinic Garden of Forking Paths: Time, Tempo and Tango
| Wiley | 2024
The Machinic Garden of Forking Paths: Time, Tempo and Tango
| Wiley | 2024
The Garden of Forking Paths. Zaha Hadid melds metaphor and landscape in a garden pavillion
British Library Online Contents | 1999
THE GARDEN OF FORKING PATHS - Zaha Hadid melds metaphor and landscape in a garden pavilion.
Online Contents | 1999