Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site aecom.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!cmcl2!philabs!aecom!schwadro
From: schwadro@aecom.UUCP (David Schwadron)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Re: Redefining free will?
Message-ID: <1247@aecom.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 13-Mar-85 10:26:06 EST
Article-I.D.: aecom.1247
Posted: Wed Mar 13 10:26:06 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 16-Mar-85 04:11:07 EST
References: <627@pyuxd.UUCP> <159@frog.UUCP> <126@spar.UUCP>
Organization: Albert Einstein Coll. of Med., NY
Lines: 16

>     The scientific viewpoint can barely parse such utterances, naturally
>     enough. Science, after all, is SUPPOSED to explain everything in terms
>     of cause and effect.
> 
> -michael

Well, maybe free will is a product of the quantum uncertainty of
our neurons firing. Science does have provisions for randomness,
a lack of cause-effect structure. It's called quantum mechanics.
There is even a minimum uncertainty (I think, though I'm not sure
:-)) inherent. 

I have a side question: Must cause precede effect??
					michab

....aecom!berger