On Jun 3, 1:00 pm, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 8:55 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > > oddly after spending 60 pages attacking free will as an illusion of an > > illusion, Sam Harris seems to that we may need retributive punishment > > anyway. > > I don't understand what's odd about that, certainly we need retributive > punishment if we don't want to be murdered in our beds.
I don't understand why anyone could not see that as a glaring violation of common sense, except that I think it must be like handedness or gender orientation. Why would punishment work in any way if people are determined to commit crimes regardless? How could punishment act on anything except the will? What law of physics supports the effectiveness of punishment? Can you punish phosphorus until phosphorus changes? Why not? > And I disagree > about "free will" being a illusion, a illusion is a real subjective > phenomenon, "free will" is just a noise. I have never seen anyone with such a personal axe to grind about this subject. You hate free will. It is unworthy of even a hallucinatory status. It is intolerable to you. It's as if you were trying to...deny something that is undeniable. Craig -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
