Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decwrl!williams@kirk.DEC (John Williams 223-3402)
From: williams@kirk.DEC (John Williams 223-3402)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Getting Nowhere, FAST!
Message-ID: <148@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 26-Aug-85 14:53:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.148
Posted: Mon Aug 26 14:53:44 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 28-Aug-85 20:54:26 EDT
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 36


	Richard.

	You seem to have forgotten something completely. Natural 
language works through analogy. Free will is a useful term for 
education. Eliminating the term free will is like eliminating 
Newtonian physics because it is not 100% accurate. You have 
appeared to have graduated past this philosophical ideal. Good 
for you. You have seen the exceptions and why this analogy is not 
completely accurate. Congratulations. Free will is *STILL* a 
useful term.

	I certainly hope that in your grand wisdom you don't fail
to leave a path to understanding. The problem as far as I can see 
between you and the term free will is that it is oversimplified.
I personally suggest that you consider expanding the meaning of 
free will to accomodate not only it's ideal meaning, but it's 
inaccuracies, as well. You will only be getting far ahead of 
yourself if you try to accurately define what everyone else 
refers to as free will.

	So, let's devise an experiment. I will choose a series of
numbers, and you will attempt to find a pattern. If you can 
accurately guess the numbers, then I will concede that I have no 
free will.

	I don't know about you, but I find the presence of free 
will easier to demonstrate than the absence of it.

	I suggest that you have to modify your understanding of 
it, as you modify your understanding of everything, everything 
that you learn through analogy.

						John.

	Forgive, but *DON'T* Forget.