[Arlo] > Fair enough. Final comment I'd just like to toss out is to consider it this > way.
[John] Will that *really* be your final comment Arlo? I wouldn't even want to assign a number to *that* probability. > You can't deny that no matter how unlikely, if for whatever reason in the > spur of the moment, you *could* choose broccoli ice-cream. The potential is > there, you simply choose not to act on it. That potential, to me, is > probability. So long as you have the freedom to choose, some probability > must exist for each choice. If you eliminate that probability, then there is > not a choice. > [John] You make your brain sound like a shaker out of which any old random thing can pop out at any moment. The Laws of Probability don't control your choices. You do. The laws of probability only describes the choices you might make. It gives you no guidance or values with which to choose. Choice is fundamental, probability is just a way of describing and predicting - inexact sciences. Furthermore, the way you use "probable" equated with choice makes your last statement tautological. If choice is just probability, then if we eliminate probability, we eliminate choice. duh. To clarify my own position, Choice is fundamental to self, but self is also a system and any system that doesn't account for randomness is doomed to fail. 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/
