- <In fact, this board is the only place I have yet to find any similar minds - neither my spouse or any of my friends agree with me!>Dear E:Just so you know you're not alone: most philosophers and many scientists don't suppose we have contra-causal free will, there's lots of literature on the subject, and the Center for Naturalism has as part of its mission debunking the idea that we're causally privileged over nature in some respect, while showing the benefits of accepting our full inclusion in the causal matrix. So you're just ahead of the curve. Some other online resources are here.best,Tom Clark----- Original Message -----From: eeeeeeeliSent: Friday, March 31, 2006 10:57 PMSubject: [naturalismphilosophyforum] Re: degrees of freedom
> >I'm not sure about others who post on the board, but I completely
> >agree that people (like the universe) have options.
> >But those options have limits:
> >- what a person can think of
> >- where they got the idea, either from learning or independent thought
> >(the latter is presently unmeasurable, yet plausibly explained by the
> >concept of the brain as a supercomputer powerful enough to derive new
> >equations (thoughts) from the synergy of seperate ideas)
> >- what is physically possible
> >- what motivates the person to action
> >Taking these mitigating factors into account, free will disappears.
> Not exactly. There is the important question of how and/or why it
> 'disappears,' and you didn't touch on it at all. Might as well say "And
> then a miracle occurs..."
Now, the mitigating factors I stated were my attempt to discount the possibility of free will - hence the term "disappears" to refer to my reasons for how & why.
You made other, actually interesting points, which I'd like to respond to, but to do so would require sifting through too much of your argumentative bile. You're obviously intelligent enough to make more of an attempt at trying to hear what I am saying, and respond to the salient points, instead of nit-picking apart every piece of ill-phrased or thinly-described proposition.
Your tendency towards snarky semantic arguments makes me think you're less interested in coming to an equal understanding of each other than to ram your "truth" down my throat. To be honest, I have only come to the conclusion that there is no free will recently, and view the whole idea as an interesting philosophical prospect. In fact, this board is the only place I have yet to find any similar minds - neither my spouse or any of my friends agree with me!
I have no interest in discussing this with you if you refuse to meet me half way. I may very well be wrong, I just don't see how yet. I have no stake in the idea, so please take a chill pill.
p.s. I apologize for getting so riled up, but I felt I needed to say that.