On 7/12/2012 12:27 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 11.07.2012 18:21 John Clark said the following:
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012  Evgenii Rudnyi<use...@rudnyi.ru>  wrote:

I understand but the question in principle still remains. Who
play the
chess, I or the M-theory?

There is no logical reason to think those two ways of explaining the
same phenomenon are incompatible. It's true that the reason a toy
balloon doesn't collapse is that the momentum of gas atoms inside the
balloon impacting the surface is greater than or equal to that of the
gas atoms outside the balloon impacting the surface, but it's also
true that the reason is just that the pressure inside is greater.
Sometimes humans find that a high level description and explanation
is more useful and sometimes they do not. Trying to understand how
hurricanes work by looking at the level of atoms would not be very
enlightening, and super-strings would be even less helpful.

John K Clark

I have read once Elbow Room by Dennett to understand how free will could be compatible with determinism. Yet, I have not understood it. I have to work it out.


In Dennett's conception 'free will' is just a marker for responsibility; hence his aphorism, "You can avoid responsibility for everything if you just make yourself small enough." So where one person might say, "Yes, it was me. I did it." another might say, "I didn't do it of my own free will. I was coerced by threats of being fired." and yet another might say, "I didn't do it. It was just the result of deterministic or random physical processes in my brain and body."


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