Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site umich.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!mb2c!umich!torek
From: torek@umich.UUCP (Paul V. Torek )
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Free Will: an analogy
Message-ID: <298@umich.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 16-Oct-85 15:02:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: umich.298
Posted: Wed Oct 16 15:02:49 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 18-Oct-85 00:37:40 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: University of Michigan, EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Lines: 33

In article <2379@sjuvax.UUCP> tmoody@sjuvax.UUCP (T. Moody) writes:
>     Somebody might object that there *are* no supernatural beings,
>and that therefore "dream" is an example of "outdated and erroneous
>terminology."  Since there are no supernatural beings, the objector
>would insist, there are no dreams either.  And anyone who might wish
>to formulate a NEW account of the nature of dreams would be guilty of
>wishful thinking, working backward from conclusions, and linguistic
>Humpty-Dumptyism.
>     Of course, anybody who actually raised this objection would
>simply be wrong.  Dreams remain there to be understood.

PRE-cisely.  Your point here sounds a lot like what I said about the
change in the definition of mass after Einstein -- did you see my 
article?  (Nobody replied to my article, was it swallowed by the bug?)
Your analogy is probably better than mine, I must admit.

>     In my view, the analogy is rather precise.  Free will is
>primarily a subjective phenomenon.  It is, roughly, one's feeling of
>being the author of one's behavior (or, at least, certain ranges of it).

I have to disagree with this.  The primary *evidence* for free will is
the subjective phenomenon, but it goes beyond that, I think.  One could
IN PRINCIPLE be mistaken in thinking that one was the author of a certain
behavior.  For example, suppose that the motion of my fingers now is
actually caused by Dr. Nefarious Neurosurgeon, who has implanted electonic
devices in my arms and is manipulating my motor nerves by a remote control
device.  Even though I experience the subjective phenomenon of being in
control of my typing, I'm not.  (But it is noteworthy that one has to
dream up a science-fiction (repeat: FICTION) example to make this point.)

Otherwise an excellent article.

--Paul V Torek						torek@umich