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!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!dual!decwrl!williams@kirk.DEC (John Williams 223-3402)
From: williams@kirk.DEC (John Williams 223-3402)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: the logic behind free will
Message-ID: <450@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 16-Sep-85 16:13:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.450
Posted: Mon Sep 16 16:13:21 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Sep-85 05:42:08 EDT
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 55


	Rich, let's follow a syllogistic form:

Major Premise: All elements of the universe are deterministic
Minor Premise: All minds are included in the set of elements in the universe
Conclusion:    All minds are deterministic.

	A nifty feat of deductive reasoning, eh?

	Unfortunately, the Major Premise was derived from inductive
reasoning. You only have evidence to support a strong correlation.
This analysis was performed from an objective perspective. I say 
unfortunately because you have only acquired confidence, not proof.

	Now for the next:

Major Premise: Determinism requires predictability
Minor Premise: All minds are unpredictable
Conclusion:    All minds are not deterministic.

	Perhaps I've got the premises mixed around, perhaps it should
actually go like this:

Major Premise: All minds are unpredictable
Minor Premise: Determinism requires predictability
Conclusion:    All minds are not deterministic.

	I decided to realign it so that the Major Premise was derived
from inductive reasoning. It is perhaps a better illustration of
how deductive analysis *HAS* to base it's premises on inductive logic.

	A lot of your argument stems from a " What if " approach. " What
if " we were able to measure all the influences? We can't. " What if "
we were able to build a molecular copier ( for you reincarnation buffs ) ?

	The difference between the two is perspective. The first is objective,
and the second is subjective. I can not accurately predict what you will
do from one moment to the next. That is the inductive evidence for the
Major Premise.

	In short, you *CAN* assert that there is no objective free will,
partially because objectivity depends on determinism, but you *CAN'T*
say that there is NO free will, because there *IS* subjective free will.

	You should try to think of the most direct experiment you can
perform to verify your hypothesis. Playing with air hockey pucks is
no way to go about proving the mind is deterministic. You only prove
that air hockey pucks are deterministic, and have to eventually apply
inductive logic.

	The most direct way of testing for free will still yields good
results. Remember, first and foremost, you are an observer. Analysis
is consequential to observation.

						John.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com