On Apr 19, 9:39 pm, John Mikes <jami...@gmail.com> wrote: > *Brent wrote:* > > ** > *"I would point out that "indeterminism" can have two different sources. > One is internal, due to the occasional quantum random event that gets > amplified to quasi-classical action. The other, much more common, is the > unpredictable (but possibly determinisitic) external event that influences > one through perception. I don't think this affects the above analysis > except to qualify the idea that external indeterminism is justly considered > enslavement*." > > An enlightened Hungarian king wrote a royal order in the 13th c. (King > Coloman, the bookworm) "De Strigiis quae non sunt..." i.e. "About the > sorcerers that do NOT exist..." - yet 1/2 millennium later they still burnt > witches the World over. So is it with the ominous > Fre-Will, and many more atavistically developed meme-stuff. Especially in > the theocratic religion chapters, but conventional science not exempted > either. As much as I like Brent's remark, I point out the (conventional > science) figment of the Physical World and its domains like a 'quantum > random event' - which would make all our 'ordered' world (view) irrelevant > and haphazardously changing, instead of following those 'oganized' physics- > (and other scientific)- rules we 'beleive in" and apply.
Even stochastic rules? Science can easily explain how the appearance of order emerges from randomness. Even Brent's > "quasi-classical action" is part of our scientific figment. Those "possibly > deterministic" EXTERNAL events are within our 'model' of the so far known > part we carry (in pesonalized adjustment) in our 'mind' - outside that SELF > in our mini-solipsism. Part of our *perceived reality.* > > I like* * "*the unpredictable (but possibly determinisitic)*' distinction > as pointing to the influences upon (our known) topics WITHIN the limited > model of our perceived reality by the 'beyond model' infinite complexity of > the everything. We have no way to learn what that infinite rest of the world > may be, yet it influences the part we got access to so it is deterministic > in our indeterministic - unpredictable world. > "Enslavement" is a term I would be careful to use in such discussion because > of its historic - societal general meaning. We - in my opinion - are not > slaves in the unlimited everything: we are part of it.Embedded into and > influenced by all of it. > > We just do not see beyond our limitations - my agnosticism. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to email@example.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.