Ian, Well, I wouldn't want anyone to think my interest was just to disagree with dmb. I'll go fishing and let you big boys deal with the Will.
Marsha On Aug 2, 2011, at 8:25 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote: > 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 ___ 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
