Channel: Mohammed Hijab
© No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever. Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate. We are working on a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system.
One of the critical issues.
And I say to you that this is one of the most common questions, that's why I'm recording it. I want people to appreciate what we're coming from the
issue of determinism and freewill.
Now, I'm saying this, let's start by saying this. I mean, the basic question is,
the basic question is this is that if everything is determined,
how you want to see both people,
we have free will we go to heaven? Hell, I love to know and love to visit does not fit you. You're right. If that's the case,
I'm not necessarily saying by the way that God, how come I was like pushing us to do what I was like, I can even conceive that like, all I'm saying, Is that who just look at from a third party perspective, yeah, third party perspective. She logically just breaks down everything has a causal effect, right? So that you're just, you're just a slave to your hive, whatever you're doing, you're just, you're just going to be doing it because of what happened before. So if you bring us lemons, this doesn't make any sense because
you're responsible for your actions.
In philosophy, there are three schools of thought.
One school of thought is called the hard determinist school of thought, which is that everything is you're basically pushed to do anything you want to do. They have a very strong argument. The argument is that with an uninterrupted causal line, as it was usually everything you're doing, even I think, as you know, because, in fact, this argument almost be revealed,
on the other hand, is almost another irrefutable argument, which is that we have an intuition of free will. Anyone can say whatever they want to do, but self evident, I'm choosing for me is self evident, I'm choosing to say the things I'm saying to you right now, it's self evident that I'm choosing to
do a good
job that they want to eat, I'll say so. But I agree that if you do have an intuition type of rule, however, there are anomalies. For example, if you go to the east, you'll see people that actually want to if they if you look close enough, for example, Buddhist, when they look close enough, while they're meditating, they realize they actually have no free will they like they're just not only gonna realize that, but they actually from direct experience, the same exact direct experience intuition, they see that
whatever it is that whatever it is that they're experiencing, there is no actual will, or do you notice that again? Did you know that? Of course, yeah. I haven't experienced that myself to say that I know that through testimony. Yes, that's true. Therefore, you can never know. That's right. I have to go through.
What I'm saying to you is that
they could be lying. It could be just saying that whatever, maybe Yeah. What I'm saying is, is that we have an intuition for you, by the way, the justice system is predicated on this.
But no one comes into the courtroom and says, Look,
why did you kill him? I The reason why I killed him is because there was an uninterrupted golden light of events that led me to kill him, therefore absolves me from the crime. So every justice system in the whole world. And by the way, there's no protest from this, you know, no one's saying that reform of the justice system was.
So in philosophy, there are three major schools of thought. This is what Islam is full on.
One of them is called the heart the terminal school of thought. The other one is more than libertarian freedom of thought, which is that everything is free will and where there's an illusion of goodwill.
And in the middle, you have the compatibility school for compatibilism is when you think there is there is a reconciliation, between your intuitive freewill and the causal line, which which pushes everything.
philosophers and theologians
have struggled as to how it would be the case that everything is determined. And at the same time, you have freewill no one has an answer of how that communication. But the problem is this logic is necessary if we consider the power of both arguments, you Intuit this free roll.
The uninterrupted causal line, the difference between the atheist or agnostic the terminus and the Muslim slash compassionate and the Muslim compassion list, is that a similar position is that there's something and by the way, you should prepare the Muslim condition is that the Muslim who says
that compatibilism is something we don't understand how it works, but the determiner is alive.
There's a poem in Arabic is
a huge library.
That is from the wonders of the Japan The compeller. That he has compelled the iPad the slaves into free will,
is compelled us into free will, which would seem paradoxical. What is
No, it's not impossible from a theological perspective. Therefore,
the fact that we have answers to our own questions now that there's something to say about your position is inconsistent. It seems like a contradiction. What if that was really the case? Forget about Islam, because compatibilism would be a system, which is philosophically compatibilism logicians and philosophers outside of Islam iconology have accepted that there is a logical necessity or there's a reason for us to believe that determinism exists at the same time as what free will now they accept go, there's a how that happens, we don't know. But just because you don't know something happened, it doesn't mean it's not true.
I rather like not get to the argument from authority just by saying because they're magicians or because they're philosophers. That's because they believe in compatibilism. That makes it true, when I was going to say was that, I'd rather another say that we shouldn't put equal weight to our, to what we consider a truth from our intuition versus rationality. If we if we look at what's truth from rationality, we can get a lot of truth from it. However, a lot of times our senses completely betray us, we cannot derive truth from that all the time. But let me say something right, rationality is based on intuition.
That's right. Because if you look at the the archetypes that rationalism, they call these Could you tell what I think, therefore I am?
If you don't have the intuitive belief of self existence,
which was, by the way, refined before his wife, it will, you've seen that I decided, who said that? There is no doubt there is existence? Because, you know, nature says,
Why does he assume I think, therefore, I am not? Yeah, it says doesn't restart position. What have you said that already kind of like,
foreshadow this, this interpretation? And he said, Well, there's no doubt that there was existence. Well, how do we know that?
To be experienced? So the point I'm making is this look, if anything, if there's going to be one thing that's going to overtake the yellow is going to be intuition overtaking rationality, because it gives us the basis for it. Have one versus a doctor. And I'm not sure
that you're saying about the argument. I'm sorry, I'm saying that this is the point I was making the beginning with the rush. This is not a Muslim specific issue. Let me say that one more time. This is not an Islamic issue, the issue of the ability of compatibilist. Sorry, yeah, but
can there be a reconciliation between free will and determinism, atheists have the same discussions, Christians have the same discussion, a Calvinist and arminian, people have the same discussions, the Jews have the same discussion of Muslims on the same discussion. In fact, there was a double layer.
so there's only determinism.
There's only free will and determinism, I think I've also noticed the middle class, which is that it never is a compatible,
compatible element that now these three schools of thought has been represented not only in Western philosophy by Islam, what I'm saying to you is that if you want to be an atheist and top one agnostic, you're not going to escape this disagreement. So you can run away from Islam, and think that the problem of determinism will have problem with determinism and the problem of free will versus determinism is going to be resolved by you running away from it. But what I'm saying to you, wherever you run, or wherever you go, this problem will persist because one of the hardest problems cannot be solved. yet. This gives us a humble humbleness, this tells us that there are limits to
understanding you're not good enough how if there is a how, how is it the case that free will connects with determinism. And what you should know is that both of those things are logically guaranteed, and intuitively guaranteed in the case of free will. So for that reason, how these things exist. We live this so called paradoxes everyday broke up in quantum mechanics, that you can have things that have no causes, you can have two complexes in the same place at the same time. We're gonna pass but all the logic are basically destroyed by quantum mechanics, but we enjoy those.
These, these pre structural contradictions, these a few contradictions, these glaring these conspicuous paradoxes, whatever you wanna call it, you enjoy them, because we know that both of those things, there must be a reason that we don't know yet. Otherwise, we would have canceled off quantum mechanics or would have come to this poker site. Okay, so then you're basically saying that, let me just try to understand what you're saying. Are you saying that because because of quantum mechanics, we can't rely on our logic in order to derive truth, no.
logic or macro science, the second one function, we can come up with
Calculate, although we cannot, for example, observe where an electron is going to be presented, we can calculate, use it very, very accurately using an appraisal, mathematical operation, up to like seven decimal places, which is extraordinarily diverse. Like, even what you're talking about, if I'm like quantum entanglement, all of that can be calculated. But it's not that you can't live convention and intuitively doesn't make any sense. I was I was also gonna comment on for the sake of
time in Georgia contradictions. So
scientists are forced to enjoy the cognitive dissonance, is that something that appears to be a contradiction? But you notice the reason why there is a contradiction? And that once the mechanics of why young science, we don't know the reasons, we don't say all because we don't know, we're gonna reject it.
What we say is that we don't know, but there was a hell out there, which is going to be maybe unraveled, or that's outside of the human capacities, right? So the husband rejected his materialism by just by annoying parts in the house. It's about learning quantum mechanical materialism just been an attempt to make himself because no, it is something that we don't know, like you mentioned. So I agree with you on that. But what I was gonna say, though, before for your point before, was that, whenever you say,
rationality is part of our intuition, I completely agree with you. However, saying, for example, that I did that I lifted this water bottle because I had the three wells, because I had because I had
What I'm saying is this, because I lifted this water bottle, from what I'm getting from Arizona, I live to this because of my interview, and I have an intuitive sense that I have free will. So I'm looking at right.
Making a rational argument is also an is also my intuition, but it's not an intuitive sense of me being rational. It's just all I'm saying is that we should have put so much weight towards free will just because there's no way to explain it. However, you can completely explained determinism. Are you saying on rational grounds that you exist?
What do you mean? Okay, so you can literally say, because I know, that makes sense. Because I because I can feel that I just,
you know, put you in tuition right?
here right? Now, while making you live.
You know, you're
more than you know, anything.
And that's why I'm saying things, you know, don't underestimate intuitive knowledge. But same time, you also agree that our senses are always what they are, right? Yeah, then that would go against rationalism, or go against science cognitive
science does is that it actually puts a third party observer that allows us to actually measure something consistent.
With consumption, you're just giving
the operators you're using a bunch of mechanics to be incorrect.
my opinion, the compatibilist position makes the most sense. You can have that position outside of his truck inside of his stomach, you will never be able to escape the agreements. For those who say why everything is written. Listen to I'm gonna interfere. Yeah. Yeah.
Listen, if for those who say what if everything is written, and how comes we have free will.
I say to the atheist, agnostic, you guys also believe everything is written and everything is
the only difference between me and you is that you guys believe is the coolest uninterrupted pools of life said hello. And we says Allah, in fact, what we say is more logical, because we have a first cause you're going to have both worlds. Therefore, you guys just went from one thing to another, you're just changing the perspective, the jargon from from, from religious and philosophical, but the concepts are exactly the same. So doesn't ultimately mean that if I can just change it from one to one side to the other does not mean that that I will never I cannot actually change everything.
This just shows you something actually shows you that Islamic knowledge is a fundamental philosophical question. And it was the only reason to acknowledge it and deal with it and give us answers, which might not be something that you understand in totality, especially in terms of analysis, but at least against some reference to it. She mentioned something about determinism material. I thought that would be
pretty silly. It says that why did this