Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 19 Jun 2012, at 19:02, R AM wrote: On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 13 Jun 2012, at 10:44, R AM wrote: I know that you and Bruno are compatibilists. I'm not attacking your notion of free will. I agree that free will is a social construct. I'm

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-19 Thread R AM
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 13 Jun 2012, at 10:44, R AM wrote: I know that you and Bruno are compatibilists. I'm not attacking your notion of free will. I agree that free will is a social construct. I'm going even further: free will doesn't

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 12 Jun 2012, at 21:21, R AM wrote: On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: No. But the gangster does not know this determination. So although at that level he could not do otherwise, from his perspective, it still can make genuine sense that he

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-13 Thread R AM
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 2:08 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/12/2012 1:06 PM, R AM wrote: Isn't that randomness? No, it's unpredictablity - something we may fruitfully model by a mathematical theory of randomness even though the dynamics are perfectly deterministic, when we

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-13 Thread R AM
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Yes, but for the sake of the argument, I wanted you to consider the case where you are pretty certain about eating spaghetti. Defenders of free will would say that free will is active whenever you make a decision,

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 13 Jun 2012, at 10:44, R AM wrote: On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 2:08 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/12/2012 1:06 PM, R AM wrote: Isn't that randomness? No, it's unpredictablity - something we may fruitfully model by a mathematical theory of randomness even though the

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 13 Jun 2012, at 15:14, R AM wrote: On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Yes, but for the sake of the argument, I wanted you to consider the case where you are pretty certain about eating spaghetti. Defenders of free will would say that free

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-12 Thread R AM
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 6:42 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/11/2012 8:45 AM, R AM wrote: But what I'm saying here is not ontological determinism but in fact, about the subjective experience. I'm defending that we cannot imagine ourselves in exactly the same subjective

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-12 Thread R AM
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:18 AM, RMahoney rmaho...@poteau.com wrote: I'm assuming you mean by exactly the same situation, every atom in it's exact same physical state. Not really. I mean the same conscious or subjective situation. From the free will point of view, decisions are conscious

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 11 Jun 2012, at 17:45, R AM wrote: On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: OK, for the sake of the argument, let's suppose that you ate spaghetti because that's what you liked at

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-12 Thread meekerdb
On 6/12/2012 1:31 AM, R AM wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 6:42 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/11/2012 8:45 AM, R AM wrote: But what I'm saying here is not ontological determinism but in fact, about the subjective experience.

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-12 Thread R AM
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:44 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Well then it seems to come down to a question of timing. If this 'same conscious state' is before the action, then I can certainly imagine changing my mind. Yes, but why would you do that? You didn't change your mind in

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-12 Thread R AM
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: No. But the gangster does not know this determination. So although at that level he could not do otherwise, from his perspective, it still can make genuine sense that he could have done otherwise, from our embedded pov

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-12 Thread R AM
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:44 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Why not. That's the compatibilist view of 'free will' and that's apparently why Sam Harris disagrees with compatibilism: he defines 'free will' to be *conscious* authorship of decisions. I think that is what is meant by

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-12 Thread meekerdb
On 6/12/2012 11:42 AM, R AM wrote: On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:44 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Well then it seems to come down to a question of timing. If this 'same conscious state' is before the action, then I can certainly imagine changing

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-12 Thread R AM
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:39 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: I means that, in retrospect, I can't trace back to external (to me) causes, a deterministic sequence that inevitably led me to do that. Isn't that randomness? Conceivably we could make an intelligent machine that

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-12 Thread meekerdb
On 6/12/2012 1:06 PM, R AM wrote: On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:39 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: I means that, in retrospect, I can't trace back to external (to me) causes, a deterministic sequence that inevitably led me to do that. Isn't that

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-11 Thread R AM
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: OK, for the sake of the argument, let's suppose that you ate spaghetti because that's what you liked at that moment. Do you think you could have done

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-11 Thread R AM
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 7:34 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: The answer must be relative to our (imperfect) knowledge. Since that knowledge is not sufficient to predict what he would do, we say Yes, he could have done otherwise. In the same way we may say, I know him well and he's

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-11 Thread RMahoney
On Monday, June 11, 2012 10:45:16 AM UTC-5, RAM wrote: But what I'm saying here is not ontological determinism but in fact, about the subjective experience. I'm defending that we cannot imagine ourselves in exactly the same subjective situation and still think that we could have done

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-07 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 06 Jun 2012, at 19:43, R AM wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:30 PM, R AM ramra...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote: I think people make choices from among available options many times every day and that is why the concept in question

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-07 Thread R AM
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: I agree free-will is silly if it is defined like that. So let us try a less silly definition. So instead of was exactly the same in your definition, we can use was exactly the same from the subject point of view. OK.

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-07 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 07 Jun 2012, at 10:00, R AM wrote: On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: I agree free-will is silly if it is defined like that. So let us try a less silly definition. So instead of was exactly the same in your definition, we can use was exactly the

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-07 Thread Evgenii Rudnyi
I have started reading Collingwood's An Essay on Metaphysics and I see one definition that seems to be pertinent to this discussion. p. 27 Def. 4. To assume it to suppose by an act of free choice. A person who 'makes an assumption' is making a supposition about which he is aware that he might

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-07 Thread R AM
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Because he remembers that he was hesitating. Yesterday I have eaten spaghetti, but I could have decide otherwise, I hesitated a lot. OK, for the sake of the argument, let's suppose that you ate spaghetti because that's

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-07 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 07 Jun 2012, at 14:15, R AM wrote: On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Because he remembers that he was hesitating. Yesterday I have eaten spaghetti, but I could have decide otherwise, I hesitated a lot. OK, for the sake of the argument, let's

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-07 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: If he axed you because he has a brain tumor that caused him to see you as an alien monster, we wouldn't hold him culpable. What's with this we business, speak for yourself I certainly would hold him culpable, I don't understand why

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-07 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: There is no meaningful difference between will and free will. The will is in the state it is in for a reason or for no reason, but according to Craig Weinberg your free will is in the state it is in for no reason and isn't in the

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-07 Thread meekerdb
On 6/7/2012 5:15 AM, R AM wrote: On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Because he remembers that he was hesitating. Yesterday I have eaten spaghetti, but I could have decide otherwise, I hesitated a lot. OK, for the sake

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread John Clark
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: while you do not *always* know what you're going to do, you know your preferences most of the time. And Turing proved that some of the time a computer can tell if it will eventually stop or not, but not all of the time. The feeling

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread Brian Tenneson
I will exercise my *insert gibberish here* by disagreeing. On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 8:53 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: while you do not *always* know what you're going to do, you know your preferences most of the time.

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread meekerdb
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 8:53 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: while you do not *always* know what you're going to do, you know your

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread Brian Tenneson
Speaking of the legal aspect, Yes, Hitler exercised his *insert gibberish here* when he issued orders to kill the Jews. IF *gibberish* does not exist, then how can we hold criminals culpable in that they had no choice but to commit crime? Seems unfair to punish anyone under those circumstances.

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread R AM
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote: Speaking of the legal aspect, Yes, Hitler exercised his *insert gibberish here* when he issued orders to kill the Jews. IF *gibberish* does not exist, then how can we hold criminals culpable in that they had no choice

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread Brian Tenneson
I think people make choices from among available options many times every day and that is why the concept in question exists. On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 9:15 AM, R AM ramra...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote: Speaking of the legal aspect,

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread meekerdb
On 6/6/2012 9:08 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote: Speaking of the legal aspect, Yes, Hitler exercised his *insert gibberish here* when he issued orders to kill the Jews. IF *gibberish* does not exist, then how can we hold criminals culpable in that they had no choice but to commit crime? Seems

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread R AM
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote: I think people make choices from among available options many times every day and that is why the concept in question exists. I agree that people make choices. I dont't think it is free will. You said that people would

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread meekerdb
On 6/6/2012 9:08 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote: Speaking of the legal aspect, Yes, Hitler exercised his *insert gibberish here* when he issued orders to kill the Jews. IF *gibberish* does not exist, then how can we hold criminals culpable in that they had no choice but to commit crime? Seems

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote: how can we hold criminals culpable in that they had no choice but to commit crime? It just mystifies me that someone would even ask a question like that. If you're chasing me with a bloody ax I don't care if you had a choice

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread meekerdb
On 6/6/2012 9:30 AM, R AM wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com mailto:tenn...@gmail.com wrote: I think people make choices from among available options many times every day and that is why the concept in question exists. I agree that people make

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Jun 6, 12:23 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: It's that idea of fairness or justice that seems to connect the idea of 'free will' to social policy.  But is it really needed to make the connection?  Why not look at as just rule utilitarianism, e.g. punishment will be a deterrent

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Jun 6, 12:37 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012  Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote:  how can we hold criminals culpable in that they had no choice but to commit crime? It just mystifies me that someone would even ask a question like that. If you're

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: It's not possible to punish something that doesn't have free will. I can't say anything directly about that because neither you nor I know what the hell free will means, but I do know what will means and if something

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread R AM
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:30 PM, R AM ramra...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote: I think people make choices from among available options many times every day and that is why the concept in question exists. Deep down, free will is the

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 06 Jun 2012, at 18:23, meekerdb wrote: On 6/6/2012 9:08 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote: Speaking of the legal aspect, Yes, Hitler exercised his *insert gibberish here* when he issued orders to kill the Jews. IF *gibberish* does not exist, then how can we hold criminals culpable in that they

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Punishment only works if something 1. cares whether or not it's experience is unpleasant Yes. 2. has causally efficacious motive to alter their behavior, No, although if the criminal's actions are

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread meekerdb
On 6/6/2012 9:37 AM, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com mailto:tenn...@gmail.com wrote: how can we hold criminals culpable in that they had no choice but to commit crime? It just mystifies me that someone would even ask a question like that. If

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread meekerdb
On 6/6/2012 10:43 AM, R AM wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:30 PM, R AM ramra...@gmail.com mailto:ramra...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com mailto:tenn...@gmail.com wrote: I think people make choices from among available options

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread R AM
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:57 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/6/2012 9:30 AM, R AM wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote: I think people make choices from among available options many times every day and that is why the concept in

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread meekerdb
On 6/6/2012 10:56 AM, R AM wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:57 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/6/2012 9:30 AM, R AM wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com mailto:tenn...@gmail.com wrote: I think

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread R AM
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 8:52 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Contral-causal, I guess. What I'm defending is that the belief in free-will is, in part, a social construct, useful from the social/legal point of view, as you say. We are educated to believe it. The social/legal concept

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-06 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Jun 6, 1:48 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: There is no meaningful difference between will and free will. Adding 'free' only emphasizes that the intention is your own and not compelled by circumstances beyond your

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-04 Thread John Clark
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: You try moving your arm with an explanation or a reason or with no reason. Did it move? That's like asking how long is a piece of string. It depends on if I wanted to move my arm or not. Now just move your arm. This time I

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-04 Thread John Clark
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: You're hung up on the idea that purposeful action must be predictable. Apparently you never studied game theory. I'm no world class expert but I've taken several college courses on game theory and I know enough to understand that

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-04 Thread John Clark
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: I don't understand what's odd about that, certainly we need retributive punishment if we don't want to be murdered in our beds. I don't understand why anyone could not see that as a glaring violation of common sense, except

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-04 Thread meekerdb
On 6/4/2012 10:07 AM, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: You're hung up on the idea that purposeful action must be predictable. Apparently you never studied game theory. I'm no world class expert but I've taken

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-03 Thread John Clark
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote: 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) If it can be done then do so! Explain choose in a way that shows it is not deterministic and

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-03 Thread John Clark
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Agent might be defined as an entity with acts unpredictably Without a reason. but purposefully. With a reason. But both of those are a little fuzzy. That's not fuzzy, it's idiotic. You can arrange the words free, decide, choose,

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-03 Thread John Clark
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 8:55 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: oddly after spending 60 pages attacking free will as an illusion of an illusion, Sam Harris seems to that we may need retributive punishment anyway. I don't understand what's odd about that, certainly we need retributive

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-03 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Jun 3, 12:38 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012  Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote: 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) If it can be done then do so!  

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-03 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Jun 3, 1:00 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 8:55 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: oddly after spending 60 pages attacking free will as an illusion of an illusion, Sam Harris seems to that we may need retributive punishment anyway. I don't

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-03 Thread meekerdb
On 6/1/2012 8:59 AM, John Clark wrote: On Thu, May 31, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Look up 'teleology'. Why? I already know it means things happen for a purpose, although it is never made clear who's purpose were talking about or what his

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-03 Thread meekerdb
On 6/3/2012 9:53 AM, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Agent might be defined as an entity with acts unpredictably Without a reason. but purposefully. With a reason. But both of those are a little fuzzy.

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-03 Thread meekerdb
On 6/3/2012 9:38 AM, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com mailto:tenn...@gmail.com wrote: 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) If it can be done

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-03 Thread meekerdb
OOPS. I hit send instead of delete. Brent On 6/3/2012 4:25 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 6/3/2012 9:38 AM, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com mailto:tenn...@gmail.com wrote: The capacity (which can be defined) of an agent (which can be defined) to be able

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread Evgenii Rudnyi
On 01.06.2012 21:30 meekerdb said the following: On 6/1/2012 11:43 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote: Cannot comment, don't know what ASCII string free will means and neither do you. John K Clark Of course there are various degrees to which it can be free but that doesn't mean free will is a

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread John Clark
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 2:48 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net 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

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread John Clark
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com 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

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread John Clark
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net 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

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread Brian Tenneson
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,

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread Brian Tenneson
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

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread meekerdb
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. Brent

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread meekerdb
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

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread meekerdb
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

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread Brian Tenneson
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 meeke...@verizon.net wrote: The hard one to define with falling into circularity is agent which is often defined as an entity

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-02 Thread meekerdb
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

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-01 Thread John Clark
On Thu, May 31, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Look up 'teleology'. Why? I already know it means things happen for a purpose, although it is never made clear who's purpose were talking about or what his purpose is supposed to be. One thing is clear, they had a purpose for a reason

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-01 Thread Brian Tenneson
Cannot comment, don't know what ASCII string free will means and neither do you. John K Clark Of course there are various degrees to which it can be free but that doesn't mean free will is a meaningless string. Freedom is defined by the observer. I note the freedom I have in choosing

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-01 Thread meekerdb
On 6/1/2012 8:59 AM, John Clark wrote: Believers in 'contra causal free will' suppose that it did not, that my 'soul' or 'spirit' initiated the physical process without any determinative physical antecedent. A belief that was enormously popular during the dark ages and led to a

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-01 Thread meekerdb
On 6/1/2012 11:43 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote: Cannot comment, don't know what ASCII string free will means and neither do you. John K Clark Of course there are various degrees to which it can be free but that doesn't mean free will is a meaningless string. Freedom is defined by

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-01 Thread Brian Tenneson
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. On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 12:30 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/1/2012 11:43 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote: Cannot comment,

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-01 Thread John Clark
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com wrote: Freedom is defined by the observer. Exactly! A man is walking down a road and spots a fork in the road far ahead. He knows of advantages and disadvantages to both paths so he isn't sure if he will go right or left, he hadn't decided.

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-06-01 Thread Evgenii Rudnyi
On 01.06.2012 20:48 meekerdb said the following: On 6/1/2012 8:59 AM, John Clark wrote: Believers in 'contra causal free will' suppose that it did not, that my 'soul' or 'spirit' initiated the physical process without any determinative physical antecedent. A belief that was enormously

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-31 Thread John Clark
On Wed, May 30, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: The axiom of choice just asserts that an arbitrary product of a family of non empty set is non empty. True, but my dictionary says arbitrary means based on a random choice or personal whim. There is no clue of direct relationship

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-31 Thread Brian Tenneson
Of course it doesn't, nothing real can have anything to do with free will because free will is gibberish. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-31 Thread John Mikes
Brian, thanks for the excerpt from the Stanford Enc. It is the usual 'scientifically' diluted 'everything', yet includes some supprt for John's quoted phrase. May I add my contribution (not included in the Enc.-txt: In -MY- belief system we are part of that infinite complexity we may call world -

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-31 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 31 May 2012, at 17:03, John Clark wrote: On Wed, May 30, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: The axiom of choice just asserts that an arbitrary product of a family of non empty set is non empty. True, but my dictionary says arbitrary means based on a random choice or

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-31 Thread meekerdb
On 5/31/2012 10:24 AM, John Clark wrote: On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Brian Tenneson tenn...@gmail.com mailto:tenn...@gmail.com wrote: Of course it doesn't, nothing real can have anything to do with free will because free will is gibberish.

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-31 Thread meekerdb
On 5/31/2012 10:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: it even has something to do with intelligence. When Alan Turing designed the first stored program electronic digital computer, the Manchester Mark 1, he insisted it have a hardware random number generator incorporated in it because he felt that

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-31 Thread John Clark
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 2:20 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: If they are rational agents then it's rational and if it's rational then there is a reason behind it and if there is a reason behind it then it's deterministic. That's not logically the case. People who believe in 'free

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-31 Thread meekerdb
On 5/31/2012 12:39 PM, John Clark wrote: On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 2:20 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: If they are rational agents then it's rational and if it's rational then there is a reason behind it and if there is a reason behind it then

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-30 Thread Stephen P. King
On 5/29/2012 11:46 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net mailto:stephe...@charter.net wrote: Hi Jesse, Would it be correct to think of arbitrary as used here as meaning some y subset Y identified by some function i

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-30 Thread Stephen P. King
On 5/29/2012 11:52 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 5/29/2012 8:11 PM, Aleksandr Lokshin wrote: The original poster introduces what free will means. 1) Every choice which is allowed in physics is a random choice or a determinate one. 2) If human free will choice exists, it is agreed that it is not

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-30 Thread Stephen P. King
On 5/30/2012 12:06 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 5/29/2012 8:47 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 5/29/2012 5:18 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Aleksandr Lokshin aaloks...@gmail.com mailto:aaloks...@gmail.com wrote: It is impossible to consider common properties of

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-30 Thread Stephen P. King
On 5/30/2012 1:25 AM, Aleksandr Lokshin wrote: 5) If one uses mathematics, then one operates with a process which is prohibited in physics. Rubbish! I insist on my statement which, unfortunately, is not understood. I stop taking part in the discussion. Best wishes Ale OK. --

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-30 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 30 May 2012, at 08:12, Stephen P. King wrote: On 5/30/2012 12:06 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 5/29/2012 8:47 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 5/29/2012 5:18 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Aleksandr Lokshin aaloks...@gmail.com wrote: It is impossible to consider

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-30 Thread Jesse Mazer
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.netwrote: On 5/29/2012 11:46 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.netwrote: Hi Jesse, Would it be correct to think of arbitrary as used here as meaning some

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-30 Thread David Nyman
On 30 May 2012 04:16, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net wrote:   I think that the word free means that it is unconstrained by a pre-given or knowable function; it is not the result of a known computational process. I'm sorry if my point was not clear. I simply meant that we can define

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-30 Thread David Nyman
On 30 May 2012 04:41, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote: Only David Nyman agreed as far as I can see See my reply to Stephen. David -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to

Re: free will and mathematics

2012-05-30 Thread Stephen P. King
On 5/30/2012 4:45 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 May 2012, at 08:12, Stephen P. King wrote: On 5/30/2012 12:06 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 5/29/2012 8:47 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 5/29/2012 5:18 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Aleksandr Lokshin aaloks...@gmail.com

  1   2   >