Some painter named Raoul Martinez doesn’t want to be held responsible for his choices and actions. He lays out the standard case for determinism in one of those slick little youtube infomercials:
What’s interesting to note about this form of scientism is how it supports my contention that determinism will eventually become part of social justice atheism.
The first give away is when Martinez portrays determinism as
threatening to systems of power and privilege that dominate our world.
Did someone say privilege?
Martinez also frames free will as a
highly convenient way to justify extreme inequality
The painter then begins to engage in some rather twisted thinking, arguing that determinism produces a powerful kind of empathy that’s a truly liberating force. Yes, he thinks determinism is “liberating.”
In fact, he even uses determinism to peddle visions of utopia by informing us that once we all deny the existence of free will, it
will turn conflict into peace, division into unity, and hate into compassion
This deterministic utopianism is delusional nonsense as there is no evidence that determinists excel at turning conflict into peace, division into unity, and hate into compassion. Consider, for example, all the New Atheist determinists. Are these the traits that characterize their handling of the religious issue? According to their determinism, no one is truly responsible for being religious. And the fact that Dawkins, Coyne, and Harris are atheists is simply a matter of luck. Yet when it comes to religion, I see no evidence that their determinism has turned their hate into compassion. I see no evidence of a willingness to co-exist with the religious in an effort to turn conflict into peace and division into unity. None.
Martinez’s dreams for determinism exist only in some freakish fantasy land.
And let’s go back to the notion that determinism is threatening to systems of power and privilege that dominate our world. I’m not so sure about that. It would seem to me that if we can convince everyone they are just a cog in the machine, then this would empower the systems of power and privilege. Because once you take away the notion of free will and responsibility, the determinists must resort to an insect-like hive mentality to enforce order on society. Here’s Martinez displaying that mentality:
We still have a right to defend society from those who pose a dangerous threat and it’s still important to establish incentives for socially beneficial behavior.
Notice the focus has been taken completely off the individual and placed solely on the Hive. In fact, did you also notice these are exactly the arguments used by social justice activists to attack free speech?
Of course, that is the poisonous nature of determinism. The reason humans are not supposed to be responsible for their actions is that they are just machinery. They are not agents. And thus you can’t hold a machine morally responsible for its actions. Yeah…..and neither do machines have rights. Those machines exist only to serve the needs of the system of machines known as “society.” So if the system of machines determines they are best served by jailing an individual machine voicing dangerous and threatening words, then so be it.
And in the end, if it is too much trouble or too expensive to fix a malfunctioning machine, what do you do with it?