If you agree, that our universe is deterministic, then shouldn't you also agree, that all control we seem to have over our decisions is illusory, meaning that every decision you seem to be able to make is just another result of different past results.
So even when you think "I'm not gonna do this, I'm gonna do that instead", it's still all conditioned by the events that happened before. If you act some way, it's not you who decides. It's the result of your experiences and some other variables (probably only biochemical), which already exist.
Knowing and understanding this doesn't mean that you have to stop doing whatever you are doing.
I believe this to be the case, but it doesn't change my life that much or make it less meaningful. I think it even helps me understand other people better, when I'm able to be mindful of the determinism while analyzing other peoples actions.
For example it helps me understand the fact, that no-one really is good or bad, but just a bundle of experiences, which form into their actions. There really is no-one to blame for the suffering someone has caused. It just happens for different reasons. (Doesn't mean that nothing should be done about it)
Also I think this understanding helped me get out of my severe depression years back - when I started thinking, that there is really no-one to blame for my situation (not me, nor others).
Maybe I can't say I understand the determinism of our universe, since I'm still living inside this illusion of control also, but I believe it to be true.
Even if we presuppose a deterministic Universe, in which all of our actions are determined through a physical algorithm, it does not necessarily resolve us our of actions. If our consciousness merely deludes us into believing in the concept of
free will, then we have the ability to abstract concepts that do not exists within the physical laws of the Universe (how would our consciousness consider a concept such as free will, if it is not implicitly contained within the structure of the Universe?) That is analogous to this computer that I am typing on developing sentience, perception, and experience following the same algorithm that it was constructed upon.
This is not an argument against determinism, it merely illustrates the notion that this algorithm allows for the generation of abstract concepts, or that the algorithm involves a description of free will. Considering the notion that we did not choose to be here, we were merely thrust upon this Universe (and that God does not exists or at best, he is a neutral integer because if we are deterministic machines afterall, then God cannot interfere with our decisions or it would be
predetermined), we are all struggling to discover our purpose. As Satre described (much better than I am about to), we give every object that we experience a purpose. We construct the plans for a hammer before we build the hammer. We determine what the purpose of a tree is, because the tree does not have a sign telling us what its purpose is;
essence precedes
existence - its form is concieved before
it exists as a real thing. However, with humanity,
existence precedes
essence - we exist and then we must define ourselves. In this context, since we are all humans and we are each subjectively defining our purpose, we are responsible for each of our actions because each of our actions affect the purpose of the whole.
Now, for a simple thought experiment that just came to mind: If we ever successfully constructed true AI, in which the algorithm was able to generate extensions of the original algorithm based upon constant, streaming external sensory data, in which it was able to calculate an outcome out of a set of possibilities, would we still call this determined?
