Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ll-xn!cit-vax!tybalt.caltech.edu!rat
From: rat@tybalt.caltech.edu.Caltech.Edu (Ray Trent)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Quantum free will
Message-ID: <965@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Date: Mon, 8-Sep-86 22:58:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: cit-vax.965
Posted: Mon Sep  8 22:58:23 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 10-Sep-86 05:35:46 EDT
Sender: news@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu
Reply-To: rat@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (Paul Torek)
Distribution: na
Organization: Icon Busters Inc.
Lines: 11

Barry Kort thinks he sees lots of reasons for wanting indeterminism.
But the only uses for it he mentions can be satisfied just as well
by a *pseudo*-random process, i.e., a deterministic one.  Therefore,
we've been given no reason for wanting specifically indeterminstic
processes. (Definition I am using:  a process is "deterministic" iff
states are caused by previous states in a manner describable by non-
probabilistic laws (e.g., Newton's laws of motion).  This usage happens 
to be followed by almost everyone, but you can put an asterisk on 
"deterministic*" and regard it as technical if you like.) 
		Paul Torek, not necessarily reflecting the views of:
		rat@tybalt.caltech.edu