Hi DMB, > Steve said to dmb: > ... Neither an autonomous agent nor a causal chain is posited as a > fundamental premise. > As a pragmatism, the question also gets dissolved when you consider the > question, what would I choose in this particular situation if I thought I did > not have a choice versus if I thought that I do have a choice? A difference > has to make a difference, but there is no difference here. > > dmb says: > Yea, if free will and determinism are taken as two mutually exclusive world > formulas and neither of them can win the day on the basis of reason or > evidence, then the difference comes down to the consequences of adopting one > or the other. In that case, it's hard for me to imagine why anyone would > choose determinism.
Steve: If determinism is true then one would "choose determinism" if and only if one were compelled to do so. ;-) I can only believe something if I actually think it is true. Clearly we don't choose beliefs freely. In fact there is no "I" outside of such value patterns. Rather we ARE our beliefs (as well as our other patterns of preference.) The above had the problem I always had with Pascal's Wager. Even if we think it would be good to believe something we think is false, we can't simply will ourselves to do so. My point was to say that free will/ determinism is an issue with no practical consequences and therefore a fake philosophical problem not that we ought to "choose free will." What could it ever mean to behave as though you don't have any choice in the matter at hand? It is to ask, what would you choose if you had no choice? A nonsensical question. DMB: >I guess for some people it feels safe and cozy. James was so depressed over >the idea that it might be true that he very nearly killed himself. I'm not >suicidal over the notion but I can definitely relate to James's reaction. Steve: Outside of a religious context I can't see how the free will/determinism question is one we ought to feel like we need to solve. It is purely philosophical in the derogatory sense of the term unless you need to sort out the theological problem of evil. I would like to see both notions dropped from discourse and replace them with a continuum of predictable versus unpredictable human behavior which is our pragmatic concern and all that we could be concerned about once we dispense with notion of an omnipotent omniscient god pulling the strings or not. Best, Steve 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/md/archives.html
