williams@kirk.DEC (John Williams 223-3402) (08/07/85)
Rich, you pointed out a phenomenon where people desire to think something and rationalize their way towards defending it. I think they've found another member. I swear I don't know why everyone is trying to make you a miserable failure. Let me outline something for you. Everyone who submits to this newsgroup thinks that they have something valuable to say. Everyone who submits to this newsgroup lives within the same reality. ( Some would disagree with me on this ) You can assure yourself that if you think something someone says to you is totally off the wall, it is most likely due to your own misinterpretation. What I see happening is these misinterpretations being used as support for your argument. I should point out that you are not the only guilty party. I believe that you believe that your theories are beneficial to mankind. There is nothing so unreasonable that I wouldn't believe that. The key to interpreting other people accurately is that they think the very same exact thing. You think the concept of free will is detrimental to society because it imposes a responsability system which has a tendency to blame individuals for social problems. TRUE? The problem is is that if you get rid of the concept of free will entirely, you start blaming society for individual problems. I still think that free will is a useful concept, as long as it is understood that we are never completely free from external influence. Let's face it, we live in an analog world, where everything affects everything else. Not only do we affect our environment, we are effected by it. I think it is equally as dangerous to blame society for everything that doesn't work in your life. Now, I don't mean to change the context too much, but perhaps you should reconsider your stand regarding free will. I think you have brought out many interesting points, and I think you should continue, but perhaps you should consider the other side for a while. You certainly won't be the first person to change their mind. Maybe the first in this newsgroup, but not the world. You're going to wear down. I'm afraid you'll have to settle for the rifined definition. Why not now, before you back yourself any further into the corner? John.
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (08/08/85)
> The problem is is that if you get rid of the concept of free > will entirely, you start blaming society for individual problems. I > still think that free will is a useful concept, as long as it is > understood that we are never completely free from external influence. Ah, the old conservative cry of "look at the liberals blaming society for what these people are obviously responsible for themselves", without thinking for a moment of what factors of causation are or were available to the "responsible" person. Just as I don't hold you responsible (or blame you, if my life situation was in a negative state) for the way I am, I don't blame me or hold me responsible for the way I am, nor do I blame or hold society responsible. The web of cause and effect is so extremely interwoven and complex that it strikes me as extremely dense to impute blame or even cause for things in a person's life directly and exclusively on particular events or things. > Let's face it, we live in an analog world, where everything > affects everything else. Not only do we affect our environment, we are > effected by it. I think it is equally as dangerous to blame society > for everything that doesn't work in your life. See above. -- "Do I just cut 'em up like regular chickens?" Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr