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!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: So THIS is how it works!
Message-ID: <1723@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Sep-85 16:22:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1723
Posted: Tue Sep 17 16:22:48 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Sep-85 04:23:35 EDT
References: <1695@pyuxd.UUCP> <1594@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week
Lines: 65

>>>You postulate that all those who believe in free will believe that some
>>>outside agent (their soul) is responsible for some of the actions in 3 or 4
>>>or 5.  Therfore you think that all those who believe in free will also
>>>believe in souls.

>>All those who believe in free will must of necessity and implication believe
>>in souls.  There is of course nothing to stop a person from holding two
>>contradictory beliefs.  It's just a sign that they haven't thought things
>through.  [ROSEN]

> I see.  "I don't care what they say, I know that they believe in souls!"
> I always wondered why I never understood Objectivity.  I always that it had
> something to do with evidence, but obviously I was wrong.
> [End heavy sarcasm, for those who didn't notice]

God, you are a flaming asshole.  Can you read?  Honestly?  I'll go through
that whole three sentence paragraph very slowly.  (I'm sorry to all readers
for the tone, but the sheer arrogance of Charle's invective smacks of crude
stupidity and not much else.)

>>All those who believe in free will must of necessity and implication believe
>>in souls.  There is of course nothing to stop a person from holding two
>>contradictory beliefs.  It's just a sign that they haven't thought things
>through.

Souls are a required implication of belief in free will by the definition.
Note (i.e., by reading the words and interpreting them) that I said "There is
of course nothing to stop a person from holding two contradictory beliefs".
This means that despite the fact that a given belief may have consequences,
a person does not have to believe in the consequences.  This is simply a sign
that that they haven't necessarily thought about the consequences.  If they
did, would they drop one?  Who knows?  Note that I never said "I know they
believe in souls", as Charles claims.  I said that sucha belief would be
a necessary consequence if they thought through the implications of the
belief.  Obviously, you are wrong, and in a very sad way this time.

>>>This is not the only objection that has been made to the thesis of strict
>>>determinism. A good many people do not buy postulate 1 -- they think that
>>>some actions are definitely caused, but others are either uncaused or
>>>self-causing.  For [them], a non-belief in determinism does not imply
>>>a belief in souls.

>>Do they believe this (obviously an assertion without evidence behind it)
>>for a solid logical reason, or because choosing that precept allows them to
>>reach a conclusion they want, e.g., god or free will?

> And I always thought that objective truth had something to do with evidence.
> Rich seems to be saying that you can claim something to be false merely
> because it is useful to someone else.  I notice that he doesn't apply this
> standard to himself, though.

Charles, it's obvious that you are so desperate to argue your vacuous points
into the ground that you will twist what I say till it turns blue.  In your
twisted way, you make it sound like "usefulness" of a conclusion has a bearing
on its truthfulness, and that I am wrong for debunking notions that serve
only because they are "useful" and not factual, as usefulness implies truth.
At least he is bold enough to claim that he has neither evidence nor objective
truth.  All we have left is to get him to admit that there is no reasoning
behind what he says.  Which is apparent anyway.

Frankly, I find it quaint that Charles is left only to defend the notion that
wanting a notion to be true is a good reason for believing in it.
-- 
"iY AHORA, INFORMACION INTERESANTE ACERCA DE... LA LLAMA!"
	Rich Rosen    ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com