[Craig, previously] > Of course, the notion that the dice chooses to land in a particular way > is absurd. But nobody claims that. We would only say that "the dice > chooses to land in a particular way" if the dice AS A WHOLE so chooses. > But it is not so absurd to say of any of the minutest parts of a die (call > it X), that it chooses a particular path. That the dice lands in a > particular way is the interaction of all the various paths of Xs. > Consider: > X chooses to go there > X prefers to go there > X values going there > X is caused to go there > X goes there because a nest of causality is invoked. > For Pirsig, all these record the same data. They differ only in their > explanatory power. Is "X goes there because a nest of causality is invoked" > any better an explanation than "X values going there"?
[Krimel] > Your first three examples here are exactly what you admit is absurd in your > first sentence. It is what is being claimed. They all imply that the dice is > a conscious agent and can decide for itself which number will come up and > that it could choose otherwise. You're confusing "the dice AS A WHOLE" with "the minutest parts of a die (call it X)". If you re-read what I wrote without this confusing presupposition, I think you'll find it more appealing. [Krimmel] > The point I have been attempting to make is that there is no single chain of > causality that leads to a particular outcome. Let's take a specific example: Say I travel from New York City to Boston. You can say there is no single chain of causality that leads to that particular outcome, because I can walk, bicycle, drive a car, ride a train or fly by airplane. But suppose I made the trip in 4 hours. Then I couldn't have walked or ridden a bicycle. And if I went alone, I couldn't have gone by train or plane. So with each further specification that I make regarding the outcome, I eliminate possible chains of causality that lead to it. What reason is there to think that as the specification becomes infinitely fine, the number of possible chains of causality can't become ONE? Craig Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
