On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 1:28 AM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> If it looks like it has a will but doesn't then it has pseudo-will.
> It only looks like it has a will if you interpret it that way. It
> doesn't look that way to me. No more than Bugs Bunny is a pseudo-
> rabbit that has a pseudo-appetite for pseudo-carrots. It could be said
> that way figuratively, and that is the sense in which any simulation
> or emulation 'exists' but literally, Bugs Bunny is a shared audio-
> visual text: A recurring part of our direct personal and indirect
> cultural sense experience.

I know that according to you I'm misinterpreting the deterministically
driven entity as having free will - we've established that much if
nothing else! So if I think it has free will but I'm wrong, it has
pseudo-free will. How can we tell that its will is pseudo-free? You
said earlier that if it's causally efficacious it can't be pseudo-free
but that's obviously wrong. What other criteria can we use to decide
if the entity in question has true free will or just looks as if it
has free will to people like me?

Stathis Papaioannou

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