Newsgroups: comp.ai,comp.robotics,comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!jqb
From: jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter)
Subject: Re: Minsky's new article
Message-ID: <jqbD0Ez5B.J8D@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <3br81l$e24@mp.cs.niu.edu> <3bvnp1$cum@mp.cs.niu.edu> <jqbD0Dw7H.Lzr@netcom.com> <3c28dj$sss@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 1994 00:10:23 GMT
Lines: 28
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai:25773 comp.robotics:16050 comp.ai.philosophy:23297

In article <3c28dj$sss@mp.cs.niu.edu>, Neil Rickert <rickert@cs.niu.edu> wrote:
>In <jqbD0Dw7H.Lzr@netcom.com> jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter) writes:
>
>>In article <3bvnp1$cum@mp.cs.niu.edu>, Neil Rickert <rickert@cs.niu.edu> wrote:
>>>There are others who believe the load that you are shovelling,
>>>because it allows them to deny that they have any control.  Armed
>>>with such a denial they can sue McDonald's for their own stupidity in
>>>holding hot coffee between their knees in a moving automobile.  But,
>>>in common with many other deniers of free will, they hold to only a
>>>half-baked version of their denial.  If they really denied free will,
>>>they would have to also deny that McDonald's had any control over the
>>>temperature of the coffee.
>
>>It seems more likely to me that they simply recognize that liability lawsuits
>>against large corporations are a good way to Get Rich Quick (tm).
>
>This may very well be involved.
>
>>But any port in a storm, eh, Neil?
>
>It is more a matter that we have our individual ways of expressing
>cynicism about some conventional theories of moral justification.
      ,
 Touche.


-- 
<J Q B>
