Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Free will: The Definition
Message-ID: <1662@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 22-Sep-85 21:40:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1662
Posted: Sun Sep 22 21:40:56 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 25-Sep-85 10:07:17 EDT
References: <164@gargoyle.UUCP> <1663@pyuxd.UUCP> <240@umich.UUCP>
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 48

In article <240@umich.UUCP> torek@umich.UUCP (Paul V. Torek ) writes:


>I think Carnes is asking for *evidence* that this is the "one and only"
>definition.  That, it seems, could only be given -- supposing (just for
>the sake of argument) that you're right -- by listing all the definitions
>in two or three dictionaries (say, Oxford English, Webster's, and a
>well-known Dictonary of Philosophy).  This might take up about fifty
>lines of netnews text.  You could then proceed to show how each of the
>definitions implies what you say after the colon in your first sentence
>above.

---> Which was:

>>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 implica-
>>tions 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 [...]

Well, in my Webster's, there are TWO definitions.  The first is the same as
Rich gives, with the significant addition of the phrase "within limitations
or with respect to some matter"; it allows for partial freedom.  The second,
however, is the notorious "choice creatively determined by conscious
subject" definition.  Considering that these two definitions are somewhat
different, it seems to me that the attempt to define the phrase "free will"
is essentially the result of this question:

   "How do we explain the phenomenon that people appear to make free
    choices?" [using free in the sense of "not determined by outside stimuli"]

My answer:
     "Perhaps they come from random processes internal to the brain."

Paul's answer:
     "They are the creative result of consciousness." [I will freely admit
      that I make no claims to the correctness of this statement in
      representing Paul's thought.]

Rich's answer:
     "It is an illusion.  All responses are determined by some set of
      previous stimuli."

It seems to me to be much more fruitful to discuss the proposition in this
form.

Charley Wingate


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com