On Mar 14, 4:34 pm, John Mikes <jami...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Craig and Brent:
> "Free Will" is not a matter of faith. One does not "believe "IN" it, or
> not".
> (Of course this is a position in my (agnostic) worldview - my 'belief' ha
> ha).
> We are part of an infinite complexity with limited capabilities to accept
> influence from the infinite factors (if those ARE factors indeed, not just
> 'relations')
> Our mental activity (assigned in our limited conventional sciences to the
> brain) is pondering consciously and unconsciously, including arguments we
> know of and arguments (not yet?) known. The result may not be deterministic
> because we are not a simpleton machine (sorry Bruno, emphasis here is on
> simpleton)
> so we may have 'options' - choices, but not 'freely at all. We have the
> power to choose disadvantegously, even knowingly so.

I agree. I never imply that free will must be absolutely free, rather
I say that there are many shades of liberty that we experience, from
the nearly involuntary physiological systems which yogic discipline
can achieve some degree of control over, to the nearly complete
freedom of our imagination. The key is that 'we have the power to
choose'. That is not explainable under determinism, which then is
forced to cast doubt on the existence of 'we' to cover for it's lack
of understanding of what it means to 'choose'.

> We know only a portion of the factors (aspects, I almost wrote: components)
>  in the infinite complexity (call it God, or nature, totality, wholeness,
> or even everything)  and surely misunderstand even those. We "humanize"
> knowledge into terms and qualia we can understand and use. Such is our
> 'model' of the world. Our mental work is influenced by the 'model-content'
> AND also by facts (?) beyond our knowable circle. Decisionmaking is a
> complex procedure using the known and unknown influences into a result
> within the givens.

It's not just decision making though. Free will is creativity,
expression, and preference. Like Bob Ross, I can choose to put a happy
little tree in my world on canvas, without any meaningful consequence
to evolutionary biology or religious righteousness. I can change my
mind and paint over the tree too. There is very little room for
determinism in this context.

> I repeat my original position: "FREE WILL" is the reins to keep human
> slaves in line by fear of violating the 'rules of power' (religious, or
> political/economic) WILLFULLY and undergoing to a punishment later on. The
> concept of SIN.
> JM

I can partially agree with that (although doing so doesn't seem to be
out of any fear of violating any rules of power') but those reigns are
still completely different from how machines are controlled.
Programming does not hem in the willful nature of a computer, it does
just the opposite, it accumulates rules through which we command
computers to impersonate our purposefulness. They have no option but
to follow their programming as they have no power to violate any rules
that they contain. They are made of rules, and so need no fear to keep
them in line. Humans have many rules, but we are not made of them, we
are made of that which makes and breaks rules.


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