On 08 Feb 2012, at 17:27, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Since it is predictable, it is deterministic
> since it is determiniistic it is no free.
Cannot comment because your definition of free will was nonsensical
and the problem seems to be more with the "free" part than the
"will" part. I have no problem with "will", it's a perfectly clear
concept, but whenever somebody hooks it up with the F word things
turn into gibberish.
With the exception of freedom, I do think that the prefix "free" might
be a gibberish prefix, like in free-will, free-market, free-mason,
free-exam, free-speech, etc. It often call for the kind of good
intentions which pave the hell, and leads to much less freedom.
But free-will is often just meaning will, in some context of freedom.
It is a generalization of responsibility.
I guess you understand the difference between a premeditated crime and
an non premeditated crime. A lawyer cannot defend someone accused of a
premeditated crime by arguing that his client was just obeying to the
physical laws. That would be a confusion of level, and in fine, an
elimination of the person, and of person's right.
Free-will is when we are conscious of making decision without complete
information. I basically think that all animals have some amount of
free-will, but higher animals can be tormented by it, like with
conflictual pulses. I said once that human free-will is the ability to
start smoking, and the ability to stop smoking.
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
For more options, visit this group at