On Jun 4, 10:37 pm, Stathis Papaioannou <stath...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> If it doesn't make sense to you then you can append "pseudo-" whenever
> >> you talk about deciding something or having free will. We make
> >> pseudo-decisions and have pseudo-free will. People who make bad
> >> pseudo-decisions get into trouble; I did it against my pseudo-will
> >> because he held a gun to my head; and so on.
> > If it's causally efficacious (gets real people into real trouble) the
> > it can't be pseudo.
> An automatic pilot has pseudo-free will according to you but it is
> still causally efficacious.

An automatic pilot has no will. It's just a program implemented
technologically. Its causal efficacy is second hand by way of being
designed by people who have free will.

> However, if your argument is now that if
> it's causally efficacious it is real then not pseudo, then that's fine
> too - and compatible with determinism.

The name describes what it is - automatic pilot: A prosthetic
extension of consensus skills derived from the senses and motives of
human pilots.


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