On 4/18/2011 10:24 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
“Free will” has too much baggage to be re-used.
So why keep it?  Why not start fresh with a nice new term that you can
use to mean exactly what you want, with no misunderstandings?

Think of a new term that you can make your own.  What could
compatibilists possibly have against that?

BUT...maybe compatibilists don’t want to make things clear?  Maybe
they welcome the confusion that reusing the older term causes amongst
the layman?

That's like telling gays they should be happy with "civil unions". "Free will", meaning free of coercion and compulsion, as used in law, is useful concept referred to in many, many decisions which set precedents - just as "marriage" appears in many laws and regulations. So there are excellent reasons of understanding to keep it. If you are a determinist, then compatibilism is the theory that shows this legal meaning is compatible with determinism; so you don't have to give it up and reinterpret hundreds of years of law and social discourse.


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

Reply via email to