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: Surely you Jest.
Message-ID: <406@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Sep-85 11:56:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.406
Posted: Thu Sep 12 11:56:38 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Sep-85 04:58:12 EDT
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 50


	Rich, your assertions that free will mean one and only
one thing are a feeble and futile attempt to set a universal 
context and force everyone to your style of thought. As I stated
before, there exists a secondary meaning which lends more 
flexibility to it's interpretation.

	While it is true that no one possesses absolute freedom, 
there is still a degree of freedom which can be measured with any 
phenomenon. The truth remains that you simply have no empirical
evidence for your belief.

	My STAND:

	Free will is a suitable term for expressing the component 
in natural evolution that allows mutation of society. Free will 
is limited to an optimized margin ( degree of freedom ) that 
promotes cohesive development. This is a requirement for
intelligence. Without freedom, there is no mutation. Without 
mutation, there is no evolution. Without evolution, there is no 
intelligence. I invite you to find a flaw.

	Now, for one of your flaws . . .

	Regulations are necessary to stabilize the environment. 
Social systems only function within certain environmental 
margins. Minimal interference is a very indirect way of looking 
at it. Certain types of interference ( or influence, interference
having " bad " implications . . . ) are actually promoted. For 
example: Schools. The basic idea is to raise the standard of 
living. Unregulated interference is transposed to subtlety, where
free will then allows a choice of alternatives. What this means 
is that you are free until such time as the alternatives can be 
determined to no longer be considered arbitrary. It is then that
culture achieves a degree of coherence, and the stable concepts 
and ideals gain acceptance. Interference should always be allowed 
at some transposed level of interaction, simply so different 
concepts are allowed to compete for acceptance. When a 
singularity becomes evident, it is adopted.

	Standards and regulations are necessary to promote 
cooperation. They represent alternatives that have been 
demonstrated to be non arbitrary.

	You show two remarkable extremes, Rich. First, you state 
that freedom doesn't exist, and second, you promote a policy that
considers freedom to be highest priority. I hope you recognize 
these idealisms. You are becoming an experienced juggler.

						John.