My major was sociology until I changed it to geology and I remember my soc teacher
making a point about an abandoned car at the side of the road (I like these examples
so much better than esoteric ones that cant be proved or disproved) and the time frame
and events that happened within the time
Bryon wrote:
<<
Maybe I'm wrong, but as I see it, the question is whether everything a
person does, are all choices made purely a function of his biology,
society, environment, etc, or is it real choice? Are we more than
the sum of our inputs?
I think that while it's possible (probable?) that we
Sorry, I have to copy messages from the archives because I'm not receiving
them all and I forgot to copy the subject line.
William wrote:
Bryon wrote:
or is it real choice?
the same as that? Why do you think there are two different things?
Well, as you are aware, some people believe there is an
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 07:35:08 -0700 (PDT), kate sisco
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My major was sociology until I changed it to geology and I remember my soc teacher
> making a point about an abandoned car at the side of the road (I like these examples
> so much better than esoteric ones that cant
On 27 Aug 2004, at 8:05 pm, Bryon Daly wrote:
Maybe I'm wrong, but as I see it, the question is whether everything a
person does, are all choices made purely a function of his biology,
society, environment, etc,
Isn't this
or is it real choice?
the same as that? Why do you think there are two diffe
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
>
> On 27 Aug 2004, at 8:05 pm, Bryon Daly wrote:
>
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 04:47:32PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
> Free will, pretty well be definition, means that it is possible to
> make
Except you don't have a useful definition of free will, as you well
know.
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
___
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:13:36 -0400, Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 04:47:32PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
Free will, pretty well be definition, means that it is possible to
make
Except you don't have a useful definition of free will, as you well
know.
Is there a use
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 04:06:34PM -0700, Doug Pensinger wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:13:36 -0400, Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 04:47:32PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
> >
> >>Free will, pretty well be definition, means that it is possible to
> >>make
> >
On 27 Aug 2004, at 10:20 pm, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Sorry, I have to copy messages from the archives because I'm not
receiving them all and I forgot to copy the subject line.
William wrote:
Bryon wrote:
or is it real choice?
the same as that? Why do you think there are two different things?
Well,
- Original Message -
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 04:47:32PM -0500, Dan Minette wrot
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 2:42 PM
Subject: thinking about free will
> Bryon wrote:
>
> <<
> Maybe I'm wrong, but as
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 08:07:55PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 5:13 PM
> Subject: Re: think
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 08:15:20PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
> Arguing the tautology that anything that is not experimentally
> testable is meaningless because it is not experimentally testable is
> not really proving anything.
Arguing the tautology that arguing the tautology that anything that
i
Erik Reuter wrote:
>
>> Free will, pretty well be definition, means that it is possible to
>> make
>
> Except you don't have a useful definition of free will, as you well
> know.
>
Free Will means that your decisions are taken by a soul.
A soul means that there is something in you that can't be ex
- Original Message -
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 8:35 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 08:07:55PM -0500, Dan Minette wr
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 09:46:49PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 8:35 PM
> Subject: Re: think
- Original Message -
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 09:46:49PM -0500, Dan Minette wr
Dan wrote:
If that makes it virtually indistinguishable, then, photons also have
free will in the same sense that we dobecause we cannot in principal,
predict where they hit. We only give probabilities, but we can measure
with enough precision to in the same manner that humans do?
Photons m
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 21:27:54 +0100, William T Goodall
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 27 Aug 2004, at 8:05 pm, Bryon Daly wrote:
>
> > Maybe I'm wrong, but as I see it, the question is whether everything a
> > person does, are all choices made purely a function of his biology,
> > society, environ
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:16:27PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 10:03 PM
> Subject: Re: think
On 28 Aug 2004, at 2:15 am, Dan Minette wrote:
If that makes it virtually indistinguishable, then, photons also have
free
will in the same sense that we do
Don't be silly. Photons don't make choices.
--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://
On 28 Aug 2004, at 3:46 am, Dan Minette wrote:
But, it has been a definition that has been around in the way I use it
for
200 years. Numerous people have used it; and have understood each
other in
using it. Given that, it is hard to assign no meaning to the
statement.
Numerous people believe
On 27 Aug 2004, at 10:47 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
On 27 Aug 2004, at
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 7:30 AM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
>
> On 28 Aug 2004, at 3:46 am, Dan Minette wrote:
>
On 28 Aug 2004, at 4:12 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 7:30 AM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
On 28 Aug 2004, at
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 10:13 AM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
>
> What you wrote has meaning? You'll have
On 28 Aug 2004, at 6:01 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 10:13 AM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
What you w
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
>
> On 28 Aug 2004, at 6:01 pm, Dan Minette w
On 28 Aug 2004, at 6:30 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
Its impossible for you to picture the world from another vantage point?
That's too bad; its very helpful.
No, it's impossible for me to see meaning where there isn't any. The
Emperor's New clothes and all that...
--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PR
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
>
> On 28 Aug 2004, at 6:30 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
>
On 28 Aug 2004, at 7:03 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
On 28 Aug 200
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
>
> On 28 Aug 2004, at 7:03 pm, Dan Minette w
On 28 Aug 2004, at 7:51 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
On 28 Aug 200
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 11:10 PM
Subject: Re: thinking about free will
> Dan wrote:
>
> > If that makes it virtually indistin
Dan wrote:
Well, that's kind of what I was trying to say - that it doesn't really
matter weather or not we really have free will until someone is able to
prove otherwise
What type of proof are you talking about? Absolute, or proof, given a
few reasonable assumptions.
Proof would be the ability
Dan wrote:
<<
Reading through this post, it seems as though it might be interpreted as
being written from antagonistic viewpoint. That is not my viewpoint. It
is more in the nature of exploring axioms sets to look for inconsistencies
and theorems that can be derived from them.
It doesn't sound a
Folks,
From the posts I've seen on this list, I'm guessing that not too many
here hold with Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker, who rejects both
what he calls the "naturalistic fallacy" (the belief that if something
is natural, it must be good) and the "moralistic fallacy" (the belief
that mora
On Aug 27, 2004, at 4:44 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Erik Reuter wrote:
Free will, pretty well be definition, means that it is possible to
make
Except you don't have a useful definition of free will, as you well
know.
Free Will means that your decisions are taken by a soul.
*Screech of tires*
...w
39 matches
Mail list logo
