On 18 Oct 2016, at 23:20, John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>
wrote:
> Well, if we assume computationalism, Carroll's equation does
not solve the mind-body problem.
Nobody has the answer to the mind body problem because nobody
knows exactly what the question is.
Well, in the computationalist theory, the problem consists to
associate the first person experiences and the feeling of a sensible
reality with the true and the provable arithmetical sentence.
>> The one problem I have with Carroll's book is that he talks
a lot about "free will" without giving us even a hint at what that
term is supposed to mean; tell me what it means and I'll tell you if
human beings have that property or not, and I'll tell you if a
roulette wheel or a Cuckoo clock has that property too.
> You have yourself propose a definition,
I said I have only seen 2 definitions of free will that were not
gibberish:
1) "Free Will" is a ASCII sequence that represents a noise some
homicides like to make with their mouth.
That seems gibberish to me.
2) "Free Will" is the inability to always predict what you will do
before you do it even if the environment is predictable. By this
definition your computer has free will because when you ask it to
multiply 96854 by 79446 it doesn't know what answer it will tell you
until it does so, and it will only do so when it finishes the
calculation.
That is correct.
> Free-will is when someone is self-determined.
Then if we have free will our senses are redundant as they provide
useless information about things outside ourselves which has nothing
to do with how we behave.
Of course not, as our self is determined by itself together with
previous sense experience recorded. Only when people have a strong
feeling of self-determination will they say "no matter what", despite
possible sense impression, like a guy determined to do skying, despite
some pain in its leg.
And if we are self determined and our senses don't effect our
behavior then why did we evolve senses?
Indeed.
I don't know about you but I am not self-determined, if I see a
brick wall directly in front of me I don't keep walking and crash
into it.
You gave me that impression.
> A kid told me that it is the ability to eat chocolate even
before dinner,
If the kid couldn't see where the chocolate was he couldn't eat
it, and if the kid couldn't taste it he wouldn't even want to eat it.
> Adding randomness or non-causal-ness, can only lower free-
will.
Tell me what "free-will" means and I'll tell you if the above is
true or not.
It is more or less the definition you gave above. technically it is
when a program emulates itself on alternate consistent extensions. It
use Kleene second recursion theorem or variant of it (if you remember
my DX = XX posts).
And non-causal-ness and randomness are the same thing,
I have many different interpretation of the term "randomness", like
the different algorithmic randomness notion (Martin-Löf, Solovay,
Chaitin), which all, technically are defined up to some constant, on
one part, and then the randomness which comes from arbitrariness (with
the coin sequence FFFFFFFFFFF... as favorite random sequence, which
can be rare, in measure theoretical sense.
Non-causal-ness is not a notion clear to me, because "causal" has to
be a derived higher-order notion when we assume (Digital) Mechanism
(alias computationalism).
so if it wan't random then it happened due to cause and effect.
You're either a cuckoo clock or a roulette wheel because there are
only 2 possibilities, event X happened due to cause and effect OR it
did not happen due to cause and effect.
There are degrees of complexity, in the feasible, and degrees of
unsolvability, in the non computable.
As the machine cannot determine herself, from her self-referentially
correct, resp. probable, points of view, she will have to consider
quite complex intermediate between the cuckoo clock and the roulette
wheel, like people and their psychology. To know if Maria is OK for
going to the movie tonight, neither the cuckoo clock, nor the roulette
wheel can help.
> The animals plants, which might react only instinctively
from immediate measurement might have much less free-will than dogs,
gorilla and humans.
Tell me what "free-will" means and I'll tell you if the above is
true or not.
Always the same John.
> In moral, free-will is needed to get a notion of personal
responsibility
No it is not. A serial murderer leaves death and grief in his wake
so if civilization is to continue he must be punished to prevent him
from murdering again and as a deterrent to prevent others from doing
similar things;
and that would be true regardless of what that odd term "free will"
means.
> All judges use the free-will notion to distinguish the 4
following cases of a man killing a woman with his car:
1) seemingly because the woman jumped on the road in front of him,
and he could not avoid her,
The man should not be punished because doing so would not prevent
similar occurrences in the future.
2) seemingly because he decided to finish all bottles of wine at the
party before leaving it with his car, and then drove like a nut.
The man should be punished because doing so would prevent similar
occurrences in the future,
> 3) seemingly because he hated her, as she decided to break
with him, and in rage use his car to kill her "purposefully".
The man should be punished because doing so would prevent similar
occurrences in the future.
4) seemingly because he is a psychopath and seems to appreciate
killing woman in a way or another, for sexual pleasure.
The man should be punished because doing so would prevent similar
occurrences in the future. And that would be true
regardless of what that odd term "free will" means.
OK, let me add a 5) he killed the woman because it get a brain disease
and confuse the woman with a djihadist going to explose itself.
Bruno
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
