These arguments pursue opposite goals. The argument of luck tends to show that if determinism is true, then our actions are the result of luck, contingency, and, therefore, free will simply dissolves into contingency and, therefore, disappears. The consequence argument claims that if indeterminism is true, then the facts of the past, along with the laws of nature, determine the future. But since we do not determine the facts of the past and the laws of nature, therefore, we do not determine our future, and therefore we do not have the free will. In her report, Maria Secatskaya tries to find a way out of this situation.
The problem of how consciousness can affect behavior, physical processes is closely related to the problem of free will. This connection is recognized by many philosophers. In his report, Dmitry Volkov, co-director of our Center, tried to present his point of view on this issue.
The leading experts on the problem of free will from the Moscow State University, St. Petersburg State University, the Higher School of Economics and, of course, the staff of our Center participated in this conference. We attach some pics and titles of reports. Video is coming soon!
Our friendly team hastens to congratulate Professor V.Vasilev, the co-director of the Center, with the presentation of such a prestigious award! This medal is a recognition of outstanding merits and contribution to the domestic philosophy.
Classical compatibilism claims that we live in a world where all processes are deterministic, but, in spite of this, free will remains. Within the “Logico-Philosophical Club of the HSE” there was a discussion on this topic, where Professor V. Vasiliev, the main defender of classical compatibilism and co-director of our Center, gave a talk.
The Moscow Center for Consciousness studies launches a project on the stufy of telepatic capacities together with the Center of Neuroscience and Cognitive Science at MSU. We announce the recruitment of volunteers!