Newsgroups: alt.philosophy.objectivism,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.meta,alt.memetics
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!udel-solaris!delmarva.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!utcsri!utgpu!pindor
From: pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor)
Subject: Re: A New Theory of Free Will -- continuation of an Open Letter to Professor Penrose
Message-ID: <DnG3Jo.67v@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca>
Organization: UTCC Public Access
References: <4el6ee$4t6@brtph500.bnr.ca> <1996Feb20.152827.14884@nb.rockwell.com> <Dn52x9.JJL@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> <4gnjtm$mbs@news.zNET.net>
Distribution: inet
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 17:35:47 GMT
Lines: 40
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.physics:173496 comp.ai:37360 comp.ai.philosophy:38262 sci.philosophy.meta:25142

In article <4gnjtm$mbs@news.zNET.net>, Russell Ward <russward@znet.com> wrote:
>pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor) wrote:
>>In article <1996Feb20.152827.14884@nb.rockwell.com>,
>>Jim Glass <glass@mrbig.rockwell.com> wrote:
>>>Again, what "caused" the "choice"?
>>>
>>>As I mentioned before, when someone asserts that she has free will, I translate
>>>this as:
>>>
>>>"My outputs are not functions of my inputs!"
>>>
>>>To which the obvious question is then: "Very well, then: what ARE your outputs
>>>functions of?"
>
>>Absolutely. The only escape from this dilemma is a reference to something
>>'mystical', like a soul, which is not subject to logic (in a similar way as 
>>God).
>
>Even the existence of a soul does not negate the dilemma. It too is an
>input in the overall equation. And I being a Bible-thumping Christian
>would find the concept of a soul as being a random-number generator
>abhorent to say the least. BTW souls and God also are not beyond
>logic.
>
>Russell
>
Please note what I have said above: "...which is not subject to logic".
The dilemma is a result of logical analysis. Once you assume that there is
something which is not subject to logic, there is no dilemma, there is no
equation. The subject (of "free will") is no more amenable to scientific
methods and becomes a matter of faith. No rational discussion is then
possible.

Andrzej

-- 
Andrzej Pindor                        The foolish reject what they see and 
University of Toronto                 not what they think; the wise reject
Information Commons                   what they think and not what they see.
pindor@breeze.hprc.utoronto.ca                      Huang Po
