This is the same with some corrections of my bad dyslexic English

The modern notion of free will is a nominalist
<https://www.google.es/search?q=nominalism+&oq=nominalism+&sugexp=chrome,mod=0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8>one.
It redefine free will in physicalist terms, when it ever was a realist
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism>question
of whether I have moral judgement between good and evil and either if I can
choose between them.


 Of course, in the modern, secularized version of Nominalism, called
Positivism<http://www.google.es/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPositivism&ei=AO2YUM2JNMvc4QTc5YGwBA&usg=AFQjCNFzHhIW3X2P0_URknz9FVC8TbWqcA>,
good, evil morals etc have no meaning. So that´s why concepts like free
will were reduced to physicalist
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism>terms.
The problem is that these redefinitions, like the one of free will, in
terms of physical laws are almost meaningless and no doubt, self
contradictory.


Other concepts, like good, evil, morals etc, that could not be reduced,
were relegated to a individual irrational sphere. Because
these irreducible concepts were involved in the most fundamental questions
for practical life, and these concepts were denied to rational discussion,
they were delegated t demagogues, revolutionaries, and various kinds of
saviors of countries and planets. This is the era of the false dichotomy
between is and ought. The results are the never ending waves of
totalitarianisms within Modernity.



2012/11/6 Alberto G. Corona <agocor...@gmail.com>

> Roger:
>
> That´s right
>
> The modern notion of free will is a nominalist
> <https://www.google.es/search?q=nominalism+&oq=nominalism+&sugexp=chrome,mod=0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8>one.
> It redefine free will in physicalist terms, when in reality it was a realist
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism>question of whether I
> have moral judgement between good and evil and either if I can choose
> between them.
>
> Of course, in nominalist terms, good, evil morals etc have no meaning. So
> that´s why concepts like free will were reduced to physicalist terms- But
> these redefintions, like the one of free will are in terms of physical laws
> is almost meaningless and no doubt, self contradictory.
>
> Other concepts, like  good, evil, morals etc, that could´n be reduced,
> were relegated to a individual irrational sphere. This is the era of the
> false dichotomy between is and ought. Because the most fundamental
> questions for practical life were denied to rational discussion, they were
> delegated to demagoges, revolutionaries, and various kinds of saviors of
> countries and planets.  The results are the never ending waves
> of totalitarianisms within Modernity.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2012/11/6 Roger Clough <rclo...@verizon.net>
>
>> Free will is a bogus issue, something akin to asking
>> how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
>>
>> Why ? Because in biology at least, the will of any entity
>> only needs to carry out what the entity desires, to survive.
>> If it can't, the entity will die and not be tend to be reproduced.
>> Case closed.
>>
>> If you accordingly include desire with will, then you have the
>> the more meaningful issue of self-determination,
>> meaning that the entity can determine and achieve
>> what it needs to survive. In philosophy, since ancient
>> times, this force to survive and actualize the entity's
>> possibilities (another term for evolution) is called
>> entelechy. So what I am saying is nothing new.
>>
>> So it's of no consequence IMHO to question whether we have
>> free will or not. The proper issue to debate is whether
>> self-determination is possible.  By self I include everything inside
>> the entities' skin or shell.
>>
>>
>> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
>> 11/6/2012
>> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>>
>>
>> ----- Receiving the following content -----
>> From: Russell Standish
>> Receiver: everything-list
>> Time: 2012-11-05, 16:50:36
>> Subject: Re: Debunking people's belief in free will takes the intention
>> out oftheir movements
>>
>>
>> So what? If you convinced someone that life is not worth living, then
>> they would be more likely to commit suicide.
>>
>> I don't think this result really adds anything too profound...
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 12:57:23PM -0500, Stephen P. King wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Let me throw something into the conversation. Craig may have
>> > linked this previously, but it needs closed inspection IMHO.
>> > Attention John Clark!
>> >
>> > "Debunking people's belief in free will takes the intention out of
>> > their movements
>> >
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>>
>> --
>> 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
>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Alberto.
>



-- 
Alberto.

-- 
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 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to