On Apr 2, 10:38 am, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Craig,
>
> What is the definition of free will you are applying here?  Please be as
> specific as possible.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason

Since free will is primitive, it is not possible to define it in terms
other than its own. That is the problem. It is the epistemological
bedrock upon which all meaningful definitions rely. Meaning itself is
a word which reiterates this by equating intention with sense. 'What
do you mean?' = 'What do you intend for me to understand?'. Intention
is part of understanding (which is why a machine can't have either
one).

The good news is that there is no need to define it because it is
inescapably obvious. We use it to participate in any way with our own
experience. We use it to control and define how we move our body and
appendages. We use it to determine what it is we pay attention to,
what we accept or emulate vs what we reject.

Craig

-- 
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 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to