Marsha, Yes, Ian
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 1:23 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ian, > > Can you explain how free-will IS relevant with the MOQ? > > > Marsha > > > > > On Aug 2, 2011, at 8:00 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote: > >> Steve, dmb >> >> I appreciate the free-will vs determinism (in the MoQ context) debate >> here is overlaid with the meta-argument about whose behaviour >> "maintaining a weak position" exasperates who and why ... etc. But on >> the core point here: >> >> Steve, I side with DMB. >> I can't buy your a-determinism / a-free-willist stance. >> >> Free-will is not irrelevant to morals in the MoQ context. >> >> By taking the a-stance I believe you are just denying particular >> definitions of free-will and/or determinism. >> >> Yes, the primary DQ/sq split changes our descriptions / explnations of >> what is going on, but it doesn't change the fact that there is a >> relationship between will chosen by conscious thought being part of >> (related to) morality - in the socio-intellectual levels of the MoQ. >> (And it gives us an entirely new description in the physio-bio >> levels.) >> >> If you deny free-will and determinism concepts outright, surely you >> just re-invite a MoQish description of the (as patterns rather than >> concepts perhaps) by another name. At the common sense level, >> (Buddhist "as if" level) the relationship is still there ? >> >> Sorry if I missed your underlying point, but it is getting hard to discern. >> I believed from earlier exchanges we were reasonably well aligned that >> free-will and determinism need not be in conflict, if one took an >> enlightened - balanced - MoQish view ? >> Ian >> >> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Steven Peterson >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi dmb, >>> >>>> Steve said:... I am saying that the term "free will" has a usage in the >>>> English language, and the MOQ's response to the question of freedom is >>>> incompatible with this everyday usage. ... and my point is that the MOQ's >>>> answer is to accept neither free will or determinism in their usual sense >>>> and I'm not talking about underlying metaphysical assumptions but rather >>>> the common ways that the term "free will" gets deployed in sentences. >>>> ...To deny free will is to deny the uncaused causer (see also Pirsig's >>>> dissolution of the mind-body problem). To deny determinism is to deny the >>>> mechanistic universe. There is nothing incompatible with doing both. >>>> >>>> >>>> dmb says: >>>> Well, as I see it, you are maintaining a very weak position in the face of >>>> overwhelming evidence to the contrary. >> [Snip] >> 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 > > > > ___ > > > 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 > 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
