Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!bellcore!petrus!sabre!zeta!epsilon!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: re: Free will: there ain't no Sanity Clause
Message-ID: <1669@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 11-Sep-85 09:29:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1669
Posted: Wed Sep 11 09:29:53 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Sep-85 06:09:51 EDT
References: <1495@pyuxd.UUCP> <2197@pucc-h> <1510@pyuxd.UUCP>
Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week
Lines: 22

>>They have "only" had one very general (yet very specific) definition:
>>the ability of human beings (or possibly some other sentient organisms)
>>to make decisions "freely", independently, without the constraints of
>>either the impositions of the external environment upon them. The implications
>>of that are that that list of constraints includes those constraints found
>>within the brain (those of course being the result of accumulated experiences
>>we acquire interpreted and collated based on previous accumulated experiences
>>we acquire interpreted and collated based on ...).    [ROSEN]

> It would appear that Rich views the constraints "found within the brain"
> as "impositions of the external environment".  If the brain is external,
> what on No-One's material Earth is *internal*? [BABA]

Of course the brain is "internal", but the way it got to be the way that it is,
with its current internal configuration, is due to the external influences that
we all experience in our lives.  The reason these should be viewed as
constraints (despite the wishes of some to dismiss them just so that we can
"get" free will) is described in the last sentence of mine quoted above
(especially the parenthetical part).
-- 
Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen.
					Rich Rosen    pyuxd!rlr