Quoting ian glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Dare I point out, > that this weeks BBC "In Our Time" > is on the subject of "probability" > http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/inourtime/inourtime.shtml > Ian > > On 5/29/08, Arlo Bensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [Platt] > > But to the extent that one follows Dynamic Quality, which is undefinable, > > one's behavior is free. > > > > [Arlo] > > You've stated before that "only man responds to Dynamic Quality". Does this > > mean that man's behavior is the only thing in the universe that is not > > deterministic? > > > > If not, since you've said a cat cannot respond to Dynamic Quality, how is > > his behavior "free"? Or is your cat governed strictly by deterministic laws? > > > > Or are you going to say now, and agree with me, that your cat can indeed > > respond to DQ (making it "free" from deterministic laws, albeit "less free" > > than man whose respond to DQ includes social and intellectual level > > affordances)? > > > > So which is it? Is your cat's behavior "free"? If so, is it because it can > > "follow Dynamic Quality"? And if not, how else can it be "free"?
Which is it? I thought you were anti-dichotomy. ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ 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/
