Le 11-avr.-05, à 08:08, Jesse Mazer a écrit :

Norman Samish wrote:

To have free will, the actions of a SAO cannot be completely predictable.
To be free of complete predictability, at least some of the SAO's actions
must ultimately depend on some kind of random event. At the most
fundamental level, this must be quantum indeterminacy.

This is not what most people mean by "free will". If I ask you to pick one of two cards, and you are initially reaching for the left card but then a random quantum event causes a muscle spasm in your arm which makes you to point to the right card instead, would you say this was an example of free will on your part?

That random event would not help indeed. But it does not answer Samish question. Actually I agree with you. I don't see how any indeterminacy could be used in free-will. I agree also with George and Russell on the fact that responsability (in which I believe) has nothing to do with free-will.
Actually I am not sure I can put any meaning on the word "free-will". My old defense (in this and other list) was just a defense of the notion of will. If someone can explain me how he/she distinguish free-will from will, I would be glad.



Reply via email to