Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!laura
From: laura@utzoo.UUCP (Laura Creighton)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Rosen on reason, etc.
Message-ID: <5331@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 24-Mar-85 13:49:46 EST
Article-I.D.: utzoo.5331
Posted: Sun Mar 24 13:49:46 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 24-Mar-85 13:49:46 EST
References: <1074@decwrl.UUCP> <5266@utzoo.UUCP>, <720@pyuxd.UUCP> <5303@utzoo.UUCP>, <749@pyuxd.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 22

Rich,
I think that you have a heirarchical notion of desires. For instance,
I could be a basically angry person, and ``choose'' to not be angry,
but I could not choose to ``not want to be angry'', or if I could,
I could not ``choose to choose to not want to be angry'' at some
point. The problem is, though, that I do not think that I store things
in my brain in such a heirarchical fashion. I think that I can change
any of the things out there, not by referring to some ``higher'' or
``more basic level'' that wants changes (either in the traditional sense
of want, or the sense that you claim rocks change), but more or less by
just doing it. 

You also seem to assume that I don't think that animals have free will.
I don't know where you go that notion. I think that animals have free
will as well, though I am not so sure about the brainless ones. I think
that the ability to think in concepts gives man a tremedous advantage in
exercising free will over animals who either do not have this ability
or have it in a more limited way, but that is not what I think you have
me saying.

Laura Creighton
utzoo!laura