Hi Steve --

You are missing the point. The question is not whether actions have
consequences, but rather where that decision to exit the room or not
comes from.

The question is whether choices represent the free will of the individual or are predetermined "patterns of quality (or intellect)" that the individual is obliged to follow. In that context, I am right on point.

I'm just saying that the future follows from the present which
follows from the past to the extent that we can tell stories about
how we got from the past to the present in terms of causes and
effects and constantly work on improving those stories to better
enable us to predict the future.

I don't think we will ever get very good at predicting the future
though we have a good mastery of some situations which can
be well-described by simple laws from physics.

You are still talking causality, Steve. This rationale is tantamount to saying that human life follows from cellular organisms which follow from inorganic matter in the chain of evolution. Human civilization does not advance by causal evolution but by the will of free people who determine their own history. History is shaped by the values we aspire to and the moral systems we institute to embody them. Wherever man's free choices are suppressed by autocracies or religious dogma, civilization is stifled. Applying the lessons learned from history is an important adjunct to human progress, but structuring morality on causative factors alone would exclude the value judgments that are vital to advancement.

[Ham]:
I can only wonder at the "reasonableness" of a philosophy
that is determined to undermine man's innate freedom.

[Steve]:
Freedom from what? What do you think your idea of free will
helps you to escape? A chain of causality perhaps?  MOQers
are not bound [to] the chain you seem to think we are. In the
MOQ, causality is an intellectual pattern. It is part of a late
evolutionary development. It is not something viewed as
foundational for reality. It is a tool for coping with reality.

Individual Freedom and Free Will are not "escape mechanisms"; they are the means whereby we may direct our values to bettering our own lives and the course of history. Human beings are not simply robotic creatures running on a programmed track through life. We are endowed with the value sensibility and reason to develop novel approaches to challenges, control and enhance our environment, and create technologies that make our productivity more satisfying and efficient. None of these innovations is a simple cause-and-effect phenomenon.

I don't think that the fact that we will always be able to tell
stories about actions and consequences to explain how we
got from the past to the present without appeal to an extra-added
ingredient must lead to fatalism. I don't see how it even CAN
lead to fatalism without imagining an omniscient god.

This "god fixation" is an anomaly that seems to have infected the MoQists. The primary source is not an "extra-added ingredient" but the necessary ground of reality. Unlike Quality, which is dependent on the realization of a cognizant being, the Source accounts for the intelligent design of the universe as well as the creation of a free agent to realize its value differentially. There is nothing "fatalistic" about the ontology of Essence, and "omniscience" does not logically apply to an absolute source.

Essentially speaking,
Ham

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

Reply via email to