On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I also have a very simple and straightforward idea of free will: I
>> exercise my free will when I make a choice without being coerced. I
>> never said that the laws of physics deny the possibility of free will,
>> but free will is impossible if you define it in such a way as to be
>> incompatible with the laws of physics or even with logic.
> Since free will has physical effects in our body and in the world, if it
> violates the laws of physics then by definition those laws of physics are
Free will is a supervenient phenomenon without separate causal power
of its own. There are many other examples of such phenomena in the
world. Evolution causes the giraffe's neck to grow longer, but
evolution is not a separate physical force that stretches the animal's
tissues. The giraffe's neck grows longer over time due to the dumb
laws of physics, and evolution is a high level description of the
behaviour of some of these laws, without any separate causal power of
> Logic has nothing to do with it since there is nothing logical
> about free will, aka sensory-motor participation. There is no logical source
> for it, or plausible function that it could serve.
But if you define free will as neither determined nor random it makes
it logically impossible.
> What about your assertion that "I make a choice..." do you think is
> supported by physics? What is I? Is it a field? Is it neurochemical? Can it
> be built out of Tinkertoys? Can Tinkertoys make intentional choices?
"I" am a higher level phenomenon built of complex biochemical processes.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.