# Re: Probability, Necessity, and Infinity

```
On 15 Nov 2010, at 20:24, 1Z wrote:```
```
```
```

On Nov 14, 11:04 pm, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
```
```On 14 Nov 2010, at 19:39, 1Z wrote:

```
```On Nov 11, 12:54 am, Rex Allen <rexallen31...@gmail.com> wrote:
```
```On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:53 PM, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
```
```On Nov 4, 4:40 am, Rex Allen <rexallen31...@gmail.com> wrote:
```
```If an entity exists in a universe that is subject to unchanging
causal
laws, how can it have justified true beliefs (a.k.a. knowledge)
either?
```
```
```
```If the entity's beliefs are the result of some more fundamental
underlying process, then those beliefs aren't held for reasons of
logic or rationality.
```
```
```
```That doesn't follow.
```
```
```
```It follows by definition.
```
```
```
```1.  IF a universe governed by causal laws -
```
```
```
```2.  THEN everything that occurs within that universe is a result of
those laws acting on the universe's state.  Every change of state
happens according to some law.
```
```
```
3. The entity's holding of some belief occurs within that universe.
```
```
```4.  Therefore the entity's holding of some belief (whether rational
*or* irrational) is a result of causal laws acting on the entity's
state, and nothing else.
```
```
```
```What else could account for the entity's holding of some particular
belief?
```
```
```
```"Logical" and "rational" are adjectives.  You're confusing
descriptive
labels with causal forces.
```
```
```
```Your argument still doesn't work. You re tacitly assuming that
being the result of causal laws is exclusive of being the result
of logic/.reason. But that is , to say the least,  not obvioius.
OTOH, it *is* obvious that being the result of causal
laws is exclusive of being freely chosen.
```
```
? Are you saying that it is obvious that compatibilism is false?
```
```
It is obvious that if there is strict causal determinism, the will is
not
free from strict causal determinism.
```
```
It is not obvious for me (and the many compatibilists).
```
Some people can premeditate crime, and this independently of the fact that some genius in psychology, or God, could have predict their act.
```

```
```
```
```Either you throw the notion of person, or you ask for a 'magical'
notion of person.
```
```
Or there is not strict causal determinism
```
```
```
I don't see how low level indeterminacy (of any sort) could help in bringing free-will. On the contrary free-will is a form of partial (from the point of view of the actor) self-determination.
```

```
```
```
```Free will is the free choice between 2+2=4,and 2+2=5.
```
```
A FW that could choose anything that is not logically impossible
would be physically miraculous.
```
```
?

```
```
A FW that was constrained always to be strictly logical would not
be all that free.
```
```
This depends on the level of description.
```
The consistency of Peano Arithmetic with lies (Bf) is already a theorem of Peano Arithmetic, and there are infinities of modal logics given different sense to logical, so "strictly logical" has not so much meaning to me. Logic is classical logic + an infinities of non classical logics. Classical logic + arithmetic entails the existence of many illogical things, even weird dreams if you assume mechanism. Free will is the high level cognitive facility which makes possible for a person to choose a way to satisfy herself in the knowledge/ belief of many alternative ways. It usually asks for (more) freedom.
```
Bruno

```
```

```
```Yes. It might even be statistically justified, but if it applies to
reality, double checking is not enough to convince of truth, there is
```
a need of an infinite-checking which can be justified for first person
```only. But science, reason, public demonstrations don't need that
```
infinite checking, and your answer goes through (if I get it correctly).
```

I think I followed that...no amount of checking
suffices for certainty, but any finite amount is unmiraculous

--
```
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
```To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
```
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en .
```
```
```
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to