Hi Alberto G. Corona  

If there are physical laws in the universe, such as
gravity, quantum mechanics and electromagnetism,
as well as dark energy, these laws must be universal or
else there would be chaos. There could be no science.
That fact refutes the nominalist position that universals 
do not exist.  

These laws are truths, so truths are universal.
Being so, they exist apart from human minds.

Physics thus tells us that a falling tree will make
a sound even if nobody is there to witness the event.

Because existence then is independent of mind
(the realist position), This also refutes Berkeley's 
position that things exist because we perceive them.

And the Ten Commandments, if they exist, exist
independent of us. If evil is the diminishment of life
and good the enhancement of it, evil and good have real effects
and so are real, whether you believe in them or not.   


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
11/6/2012  
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen 


----- Receiving the following content -----  
From: Alberto G. Corona  
Receiver: everything-list  
Time: 2012-11-06, 06:02:52 
Subject: Re: WHY FREE WILL IS A BOGUS ISSUE 




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


The modern notion of free will is a?nominalist?one. It redefine free will in 
physicalist terms, when it ever was a?realist?question of whether I have moral 
judgement between good and evil and either if I can choose between them.? 


?f course, in the modern, secularized version of Nominalism, called?Positivism, 
good, evil morals etc have no meaning. So that? why concepts like free will 
were reduced to?physicalist?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?rreducible?oncepts 
were involved in the most fundamental questions for practical life, and these 
concepts were denied to rational discussion, they were delegated t?emagogues, 
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  

Roger: 


That? right 


The modern notion of free will is a nominalist one. It redefine free will in 
physicalist terms, when in reality it was a realist 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? 
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 ?ood, evil, morals etc, that could? be reduced, were 
relegated to a individual irrational sphere. This is the era of the 
false?ichotomy?etween 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. ?he results are the never ending waves of?otalitarianisms?ithin 
Modernity. 











2012/11/6 Roger Clough  

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. ?y 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.

-- 
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