On 01 Jun 2012, at 20:18, meekerdb wrote:
On 6/1/2012 10:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
You might be disturbed by the fact that in experience 2, the
"original" remains the same person, so we don't count him as a
new person, each time he steps in the box. This, in my opinion,
illustrates agai
On 01 Jun 2012, at 23:42, RMahoney wrote:
Does a Free Willer believe they willed themselves into existence in
this Universe?
Some can believe that. Open question in comp. Actually "this
universe"
is a quite vague concept with comp.
Don't know comp.
comp is the idea that we are (a prior
On 2 June 2012 10:29, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> or read my recent conversation with Charles and LizR)
On the FOAR list, that is!
David
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googl
On Jun 2, 2:39 am, Jason Resch wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> > I think that Matter-Energy and Sense-Motive are dual aspects of the
> > same thing. If you are talking about the brain only, then you are
> > talking about matter and energy, but no person exists
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 2:48 PM, meekerdb wrote:
> >> A belief that was enormously popular during the dark ages and led to a
> thousand years of philosophical dead ends; not surprising really, confusion
> is inevitable if you insist on trying to make sense out of gibberish.
>
> > So you think the
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 Brian Tenneson wrote:
> The fact that free will is debated lends credence to the notion that
> "Free will" is not meaningless. "Free will" has to mean something before
> it can be attacked.
But I'm not saying "free will" does not exist, and I'm not attacking it
because the
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 meekerdb wrote:
> Can existing practice be justified on a purely utilitarian basis?
>
Yes.
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegro
The capacity (which can be defined) of an agent (which can be defined) to
be able (which can be defined) to choose (which can be defined) when (which
can be defined) presented (which can be defined) with a choice (which can
be defined).
Certainly not meaningless.
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 9:58 AM,
On 6/2/2012 1:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Jun 2012, at 20:18, meekerdb wrote:
On 6/1/2012 10:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
You might be disturbed by the fact that in experience 2, the "original" remains the
same person, so we don't count him as a new person, each time he steps in the box.
FREE means being *able *to choose *any *among a number of choices. You
want freedom of will to mean an agent can choose something beyond what the
given choices are? That would imply free will does not exist yet, in that
event, free will is still NOT meaningless.
Right now I am unconcerned with w
The hard one to define with falling into circularity is "agent" which is often defined as
an entity with free will. To test something you need an operational definition. "Agent"
might be defined as an entity with acts unpredictably but purposefully. But both of those
are a little fuzzy.
Bre
On 6/2/2012 11:45 AM, John Mikes wrote:
Did ANYBODY so far - among those ~100(+?) posts (so far erased in this discussion) *I D
E N T I F Y* */_free will_/*?
I've tried to identify two meanings: One, which I consider unproblematic, is the social
and legal attribute of decisions which are not
On 6/1/2012 11:25 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
The fuss is because the concept is thought to be fundamental to
jurisprudence and social policy (it's even cited in some Supreme
Court decisions). The concept of free will has been carried over from
past theological and philosophical ideas. But now the
How about define agent to be a type 4 agent as explained here:
http://cs.wallawalla.edu/~aabyan/Colloquia/Aware/aware2.html
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 5:22 PM, meekerdb wrote:
> The hard one to define with falling into circularity is "agent" which is
> often defined as an entity with free will. To
I don't think any of us qualify since you have to believe and be aware of your belief of
every tautology which means all possible mathematical proofs.
Actually it seems to me that so much self awareness is contrary to the common notion of
'free will'. The feeling of 'free will' comes about bec
15 matches
Mail list logo
