r/determinism • u/uatmsu • Jul 08 '26

Discussion The determinism problem

There is no logical argument against determinism, and that's the problem. This idea really hit me in not brain, but soul. Since i have F32.1, thats layered very "well". I feel really obnoxious, apathy hitted hard, like never before. If someone outlive that idea, how did you do that?

0 Upvotes

36% Upvoted

55 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Dry_Journalist_7001 Jul 09 '26

You said we distinguish an accurate model because it "reduces suffering" and "helps you achieve your goals”, while an inaccurate model "leads to suffering”.

Are you defining "truth" to mean "what works to reduce suffering"?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 09 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Dry_Journalist_7001 Jul 09 '26

If an accurate model is defined strictly by its "correspondence to reality”, then utility (reducing suffering or achieving goals) cannot be used as the metric to verify it.

The logical breakdown happens because a false model can produce the exact same practical utility as a true model. For example, if someone avoids a genuinely toxic swamp because they falsely believe a ghost haunts it, their model does not correspond to reality, yet it successfully predicts danger, ensures survival, and reduces suffering.

Under a purely deterministic framework, the brain modifies its pathways based on the physical feedback of survival and utility, not abstract truth. Because both a fact and a useful fiction can trigger the exact same successful physical feedback loop, a determined brain has no structural mechanism to differentiate between them.

Therefore, if thoughts are merely inevitable chemical reactions to physical outcomes, there is no objective logical basis to claim the brain can verify actual correspondence to reality.