How to win an Argument with a Determinist?

Photo by Carla Oliveira on Unsplash

I think I cracked a tough philosophical problem.

Philosophical Determinism is the idea that everything that happens has a cause, as if all parts of the universe were like a giant pool table, the balls bouncing off one another according to the laws of physics. Once set in motion, nothing can change the reactions that follow. This position is a central part of scientific reductionism, which seeks to explain behaviour of complex entities by reducing them to the actions of their component (and determined) parts. For example, a reductionist looking at cells would reduce their behaviors to the actions collections of atoms and molecules. In psychology, a determinist approach proposes free will is an illusion; our behaviour is governed by entirely internal or external forces of cause and effect over which we have no control.

It’s hard to argue with determinists. They seem to have the laws of physics on their side. For any argument that certain specific events undetermined or the product of free will, the ready answer of determinists is that if science could fully understand the complexity of the situation, then it could of course be broken down into mechanical cause and effects — right down to the most minute element of human behavior. There is no way to disprove such a hypothetical stance.