On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: > > Le 18-juil.-12, à 15:28, R AM a écrit : > > >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: > > > I gave a definition of compatibilist free-will which is not "without > coercion". I define free-will as the ability to make willing-full choice in > absence of complete information, and in the presence of the awareness of our > ignorance for some near future. I can practice that free-will even alone at > home, like when hesitating between coffee and tea.
Why not call it decision making? or will? why free-will? free from what? > I guess you mean by "metaphysical free-will" the usual spurious definition > based on third person indeterminacy. I think metaphysical free-will implies third person indeterminacy. But free-will is perceived by people as some sort of "power" to make absolutely free decisions. > It does not exist if we assume > computationalism. But a slight difference introduced in that definition > (replace the 3-indeterminacy by a weaker self-indeterminacy, based on Turing > and not on the first person indeterminacy) makes the notion full of sense, > and provable for all universal machine having enough cognitive abilities > (Löbian). Indeterminacy is a consequence of metaphysical free-will, but it's not free-will in itself. Your first-person indeterminacy implies that all possible decisions are made. I don't think this fits well with the idea of metaphysical free-will. -- 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@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
