cbostrum (08/01/82)
More re: determinism. In Jim Gardners essay, we find him talking about
absolute time ("3 seconds"). Thats pretty hard to do in that context.
We also have him saying that "You can predict what you can do". This is not
plausible either. In fact, it has been shown by Karl Popper and D.M. MacKay
that in a traditional deterministic system, it is impossible for internal
agents to predict with certainty what the behavior of the system will be,
even although it is in fact determined (in the sense that an outside
observer could perform the prediction with arbitrary precision). This has
been taken by MacKay as an argument for "free will". (He, by the way, is
a devout Xtian).
More re: Free Will. I fully fail to understand Brad Templetons claims about
the things that are impossible in a deterministic situation. Even if this
were so (and choice, thought, reason, etc were impossible) crying about it
doesnt establish Free Will, does it. Not only that, but I have never been
able to understand how the absense of determinism alone could provide Free
Will. As far as I can see, it would just be randomness, caprice. Even
if we could control this randomness, as Brad claims, this just means we get
a unioning of the features of determinism and randomness, and I cannot see
Free Will in this at all.
However, I would categorically deny (as a 30% devils advocate) that
thought, choice, rationality, etc. were impossible in a deterministic
environment. In fact, I think they make much more sense there than anywhere
else! This to me seems perfectly clear, but I would love to be dissuaded.laura (08/01/82)
Hmm. I see a problem in semantics here. (This is just as bad a Newcomb's paradox, guys, and remember i was willing to take both boxes if only to flaunt my belief in free will!). This is what my brain come up with as an instant definition of free will: that at a given time my actions arise from my own nature and ability to make decisions. deterministic universe: that at any given time the universe is fixed (static) past, present, and future. of course, this is probably an oversimplification, but i think that it covers the essentials. Now, can anyone explain to me in simple terms, how the two can be *both* possible? (If you can, and you are a gnostic, then you have a very good chance of converting this atheist (Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays) /agnostic (Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays and when I wax theological) for it was this very question that convinced me that my nice religion had serious holes in it. But the explanation had better be good! Take it this way: I am hungry tonight and decide that I want a pizza for dinner. The only pizza parlors which are open now and within easy walking distance are a) Frank Vetere's and b) Poretta's. Now I *like* the way FV puts pineapple on pizza... and it's closer... but true to form, I go to Poretta's because I prefer to support independant restaurants run by their owners over franchises. Fine. I have made a decision which is (as far as I am concerned) exercising my free will. Lo and behold, before i get to Poretta's I am run over by a truck and end up in hospital. As it turns out, if I had gone to FV I would not have been hospitalized. It seems I made the wrong decision. (Except that I meet person X who has connections with Lucasfilms and as a result of this I get to work with neat, fancy graphic equipment for as long as I want to....) Now, if the universe is fixed, then I have not made any decision at all, but have only gone through the motions of "making a decision" which entails doing something, much as a marionette on a string, which I was destined to do, all the while making a good deal of racket about this "meaningless noise" ... DECISION MAKING... which isnt the same thing at all...therefore I have no free will. This is not the same as claiming that there are people (who have listened to me rant and rave about supporting the small business man who is likely to be my neighbour as opposed to the corporation of nameless faces) who could predict that I would go to Poretta's on general principles, nor the same as saying that it was impossible for me to go to FV -- for I have eaten there on many occasions. The rand corporation makes lots of predictions, some of which come true, and still dont claim that the universe is deterministic (last I heard, anyway). If the universe if determined, I cant see that I made a decision and if I cant make decisons, then I dont have free will... so you get one or the other but not both. laura creighton decvax!utzoo!laura p.s. would it wreck your argument if I decided to flip a coin to decide what restaurant to go to?
3951bb (08/02/82)
An interesting problem arises without free will in justice system. Who could be arrested, no criminal guilty because they were not in a state of mind to choose between right and wrong. Some would argue that they had the ability to choose but that choice was irrelevant in a determinstic universe. Should we let go if they claimed that they chose to not act as they did but acted anyway because of their choice. An example of this was the nazi trials. Many claim that they did not choose to do it, yet they didwhat they did. I think that determinism is a state of mind. (think about it, but we all know what your thoughts are going to be, anyway, no?) lazaro munoz mhuxm!3951bb