Final answer:
Nonlocal deterministic theories are considered less plausible than indeterminism because they contradict notions of free will and moral responsibility, and challenge our experiential belief in genuine choice making, whereas indeterminism allows for unpredictability and freedom, supported by quantum uncertainties.
Step-by-step explanation:
Nonlocal deterministic theories are considered less plausible than indeterminism largely because they conflict with our observed experiences and the notions of free will and moral responsibility. Deterministic theories, such as those proposed by Baron D'Holbach, assert that all events, including human actions, are dictated by causal laws. According to this view, if determinism is true, the sensation that we genuinely deliberate and make choices is merely an illusion, and we are not truly free agents, as argued by philosophers like Taylor.
On the other hand, indeterminism, supported by philosophers like William James, maintains that not all events are the inevitable outcomes of preceding causes, leaving room for genuine human freedom and accountability. The debate between compatibilism and incompatibilism further explores whether free will can coexist with deterministic views, with soft determinists suggesting a possible reconciliation. Considering quantum mechanics and the unpredictability at the quantum level, the universe's total determinacy becomes questionable, providing a basis for the plausibility of indeterminism over nonlocal deterministic theories.