On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:01:09AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 11 Aug 2012, at 09:45, Russell Standish wrote:
> >
> >Nevertheless, randomness is a key component of free will.
> So comp is false? I mean comp can only defend a compatibilist (or
> mechanist, deterministic) theory of free-will, like with the self-
> indetermination based on diagonalization.
> I have never seen how we can use randomness to justify free-will.
> May be you can elaborate?
> Bruno

If there are several actions an agent may perform, and one optimal in
terms of the agent's utility, but the utility is computationally
unfeasible, then an agent can choose one of the actions by random choice.

I don't see why this would entail comp is false though. Perhaps you
could elaborate?


Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics      hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales          http://www.hpcoders.com.au

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