Hi, Gary,
So, am I right to guess that wearing that hat implies a position on the meaning of the word, “random”? How does that go?
Nick
Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Gary Schiltz
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 5:27 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] alternative response
Putting on my determinist hat (which I usually wear), I would say that the event of the neighbor passing by your study
was pre-determined by the forces established at the instant of the Big Bang. As is everything else.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 4:59 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:
Is the question whether it was "pre-determined?" Or is the question whether
it was predetermined by Charles?? I have a neighbor who passes my study
window every afternoon at 4pm with his very floppy cocker spaniel. Is that
event predetermined by the dog (who begs to go out at 3.30), by Scott (who
welcomes the distraction), by the clock (which he checks to keep the dog
honest), or ....
I know this because I used to set out for coffee every afternoon at that
time, and we would often meet on my doorstep and walk together a few paces
down the street. Because of COVID I don't do that any more. Did COVID
determine my change of behavior? Or did I make a FREE choice.
I think the freedom of free will is just an ideological matter. Each of us
is supposed to be a master of our behavior and circumstances. Indeed, in
some jurisdictions, you can be popped in the loony-bin for not being so. In
which case, I think, the loony bin is where we all belong. Or perhaps are?
Anyway, Glen will accuse me of strawmanning again. Forgive me. I have been
tortured by dualists all my life, and now I am visiting my revengte on all
of you.
Nick
Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jon Zingale
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 3:38 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] alternative response
An attempt to steelman via wingman:
The idea that Glen is proposing is to highlight a sweet spot in one's
experience where unfamiliarity competes with habit. Glen advocates for
bracketing questions of a prime mover or that which happens in pathological
limits. Instead, he wishes to constrain the scope of free will to a question
of free versus bound with respect to some arbitrary
component/scale/neighborhood (the free will zone). I will try not to fight
this as I still think of this interpretation of *free will* as being a
discussion of will, determined or not. For instance, I may be willful and
determined.
The value
I see in Glen's perspective is that we can develop a grammar for discussing
deliberate action, perhaps involving a Bayesian update rule to an otherwise
evaporative memory or local foresight. He is advocating to not concern
ourselves with whether or not Charles Bukowski was *predestined* to be a
drunk, but rather with determining where the *choice* to do otherwise may
have been.
--
Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |