Ian says he is "not getting what [Steve's] disagreement actually is [with dmb]":
So let's come back to your [Steve's] statement "moral (responsibility) and free
will are not linked (as a logical necessity)" ... I am at a loss to understand
how you are separating free-will from responsibility (at any level, common
sense, science, MoQ or metaphysical in general).
dmb says:
As I understand it, the nature of the disagreement is very simple. Steve says
they are not linked and I say that his denial defies logic and overwhelming
evidence to the contrary.
I tried, unsuccessfully, to get Steve to put every other factor aside and just
focus on the sheer logic of it. I thought if you looked at that single brick
with fresh eyes he'd see for himself what I mean. And so I asked just one
question.
If our actions are determined, then how can we be held responsible for those
actions?
I think that Steve cannot answer that question because it is logically
impossible. NOBODY can answer that question because you cannot be held
responsible for actions over which you have no control. Who says you aren't
responsible unless you have a choice? Mr. Pirsig, Mr. Logic, Mr. dictionary and
her highness, Princess encyclopedia, that's who.
At one point, if memory serves, Steve even went so far as to say that Pirsig
doesn't talk about moral responsibility and otherwise suggested it plays no
important role in the MOQ. As far as I can figure, this odd stance is a result
of trying to make the MOQ accommodate Sam Harris's neurological determinism
wherein persons are as morally culpable as tornadoes.
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
