Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site spar.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!spar!ellis From: ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Re: External Influences Message-ID: <537@spar.UUCP> Date: Tue, 24-Sep-85 07:41:27 EDT Article-I.D.: spar.537 Posted: Tue Sep 24 07:41:27 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 26-Sep-85 08:26:25 EDT References: <3518@decwrl.UUCP> <1451@pyuxd.UUCP> <661@psivax.UUCP> Reply-To: ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) Organization: Schlumberger Palo Alto Research, CA Lines: 34 >> The freest minds I know can be brutally self-scrutinizing as appropriate, >> yet otherwise follow spontaneous impulse as effortlessly as a frog might >> splash into an old pond. > >The difference between a genius and an average Joe/Joan like you or me is >in their ability to make use of intuition and spontaneity. Intuition and >spontaneity aren't "great" things, they're only great when the results of >using them are great. Geniuses (or whatever you want to call them) simply >have learned how to make the best use of these tools. Even irrational dullards who have love in the hearts can work wonders with little more than childlike spontaneity. >Is the reason you believe in "acausality" because you know that the only >abilities open to us otherwise do not allow for "freedom"? I do not believe in "acausality", if belief is taken to mean faith contrary to reason. Rather, I have concluded by examining the empirical evidence and rigorous arguments that causal determinism is an archaic a priori assertion that contradicts facts of the physical world we live in. And I am fully prepared to accept the triumphant return of determinism if and when the evidence indicates otherwise. >I for one find the abilities we do have to be more than adequate, in fact >quite incredible. Bravo -- we totally agree on this point.. "Carry data chop logic" -michael Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com