On Feb 6, 9:48 pm, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 6, 7:12 am, ronaldheld <ronaldh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > arXiv:1202.0720v1 [physics.hist-ph]
> > Abstract
> > It is argued that it is possible to give operational meaning to free
> > will and
> > the process of making a choice without employing metaphysics.
> > comments?
> It depends if you consider biology metaphysical. Free will is a
> capacity which we associate with living organisms,

rightly or wrongly

> particularly if
> they have some kind of system of self-directed propulsion. With the
> ability to move freely comes the opportunity for more sophisticated
> forms of intentionality to develop. This is not to say that a plant
> doesn't not have some measure of free will, but it seems that the true
> potential of will is tied up in control over location. Like many other
> biological qualities (feeling, desire, etc), free will doesn't
> translate meaningfully into the language of physics.

That might mean it never existed, and our "association" was wrong.
What's the  counterargument?

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