On 01 Jun 2012, at 23:42, RMahoney wrote:
Does a Free Willer believe they willed themselves into existence in
Some can believe that. Open question in comp. Actually "this
is a quite vague concept with comp.
Don't know comp.
comp is the idea that we are (a priori material or natural) machine.
It the old mechanism of Descartes, without the dualism.
But it leads to the fact that matter and nature exists only in
number's dream (that computation in arithmetic seen from the first
person point of view). See my papers for the argument, or read my
recent conversation with Charles and LizR).
As far as I'm concerned, universe can be everything,
I don't believe there is a mind separate from body. You don't have a
mind (or a soul,
or whatever metaphysical description of consciousness one might
subscribe to) until
you have the matter and energy arranged to form the mind.
That's locally true for the human mind, but globally false. Matter
emerges from the interference of the many computations/dream occuring
matter is a mental
concept but yeah, whatever makes up the calculation of that stuff we
matter and energy.
Computer is a mathematical notion, even arithmetical. Once you accept
elementary arithmetic, all computations are there, and it makes
arithmetic a realm of everything (even a tiny part of arithmetic
Advantage: it explains where the laws of physics come from, and it
gives the mean to distinguish quanta and qulaia, and explain the
difference of their nature.
When that comes together, you have a mind, and at
that mind develops a will, but not the other way around.
They seem to think this free will has some ability to manipulate the
Universe in ways that avoid it's laws.
Not the compatibilist one. I think free will is not prevented at all
I agree, will (free has no meaning to me) is enabled by determinism.
If there were no
process of cause/effect then there could be no calculation of will.
I don't believe I willed myself into existence. I cannot will myself
to avoid the end of my existence.
If that exists. Again "my existence" is quite a vague notion.
Basically I'm saying existence is needed before a will can exist, not
the other way around.
Yes. But with comp we need only the existence in the same sense as
"prime numbers exist". We don't need and actually cannot use the
hypothesis of existence of primary matter (Aristotle).
You have to build the computer before you can execute a program, not
the other way around.
Computer are just relative universal number (I am explaining this
currently in other thread).
While I'm here I cannot break any of
the laws of the Universe. We are all molecular machines.
Locally, that is very plausible, but near death, this is no more
assured unless you introduce actual infinities in bith matter and
mind, and some link between. We are not bodies, we own bodies.
Molecules are clothes, and actually they are map of our most probable
computations in arithmetic. This is a consequence of the idea that
are machines". It makes materialism wrong eventually. Matter is a
We are the program which does not exist without the machine
molecules operate within the laws of the Universe.
If that exists. Locally, it is true, but not globally.
Locally and currently, yes, I understand.
The result of their
action allows me to think and reason and decide on a course of
execute a will so to speak, but that will is determined by the
sequence of events of the molecules that make up my self. To say
will" implies that I somehow avoided the laws of the Universe and
resulting cause and effect. "Free" from the laws of the Universe. In
that sense, there is no such thing as "free will", only "will", that
is determined by your physical being and sequence of molecular
Now I myself believe that probably the laws of the Universe allow it
to be non-deterministic. My logic might be simple on this, but if
there were no randomness at all, there could be no evolution of the
Universe (and probably the laws of the Universe) to become the
Universe we observe today. I think if we started (over and over
with the same initial condition of this moment, that the next moment
could be any number of potential outcomes, all within the same
the same Universe. The Universe is built upon the laws of
and at the short term macro level things can be fairly predictable,
but at the micro level and over long periods of time, things are not
so predictable, due to random events at the quantum level. I also
subscribe to the idea that all possible outcomes exist
and forever, as do all possible histories.
OK. But with different probabilities, and we can manage them from
Yes I understand. We can manage to an extent. There are probable
of our attempts at managing. If restarted with all same initial
same attempt at managing the probable outcome may result in a
outcome. (Many with equal probability, some not so probable). At any
in time I think multiple outcomes emerge in the next instant, each
just as real
to the observer/manager. Or should I say observers/managers, as there
multiple of these for each multiple outcome.
A good thing to avoid sending to a gibberish message.
I didn't catch the intent of this statement. Maybe I did.
Snipped the rest as we seem to agree on the rest.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at