On Nov 27, 8:53 pm, Rex Allen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 7:44 AM, 1Z <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Nov 26, 6:31 am, Rex Allen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Any defense of "free will" must allow for ultimate responsibility for > >> actions. > > > Mine does > > Random events don't qualify as free will.
So you say. I think that;s arbitrary. I think the real object is to irrational decision, and I have argued that rationality is compatible with FW I could "prove" you don;t exist by redefining "Rex Allen" to mean "square circle". So what? Philosophical questions always boil down to definitiions, and particularly, to how reaosnable they are. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
