On Feb 9, 5:03 am, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

> 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.

This I don't like as much as this:

> I said once that human free-will is the ability to
> start smoking, and the ability to stop smoking.

because the former doesn't apply to the latter, since the completeness
of information does not figure into being able to smoke or not to
smoke. Knowing that you don't have complete information isn't really
part of will (agnosticism doesn't generate the capacity for will where
there is none) or even freedom (not knowing the answer to a particular
math problem doesn't create license to believe that an answer can be
made up), but it is a necessary aspect of subjectivity in general.


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