Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site sjuvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!astrovax!sjuvax!tmoody
From: tmoody@sjuvax.UUCP (T. Moody)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Free Will: an analogy
Message-ID: <2413@sjuvax.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 19-Oct-85 10:29:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: sjuvax.2413
Posted: Sat Oct 19 10:29:21 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 21-Oct-85 04:02:02 EDT
References: <298@umich.UUCP>
Reply-To: tmoody@sjuvax.UUCP (T. Moody)
Distribution: net
Organization: St. Joseph's University, Phila. PA.
Lines: 31
Summary: 

In article <298@umich.UUCP> torek@umich.UUCP (Paul V. Torek ) writes:
>>     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?)

It was not swallowed by the bug.  It was, in fact, right on the money.
I was only looking for an analogy that would map the subjective/objective
aspect a bit more vividly.

>>     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. 

Good point.  It seems to me that one of the main problems here is just
sorting the subjective and objective conditions for the application
of the expression 'free will'.



Todd Moody                 |  {allegra|astrovax|bpa|burdvax}!sjuvax!tmoody
Philosophy Department      |
St. Joseph's U.            |         "I couldn't fail to
Philadelphia, PA   19131   |          disagree with you less."