[MD] Chance

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting ian glendinning <psybertron at gmail.com>:

> Dare I point out,
> that this weeks BBC "In Our Time"
> is on the subject of "probability"
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/inourtime/inourtime.shtml
> Ian
> 
> On 5/29/08, Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
> > [Platt]
> > But to the extent that one follows Dynamic Quality, which is undefinable,
> > one's behavior is free.
> >
> > [Arlo]
> > You've stated before that "only man responds to Dynamic Quality". Does this
> > mean that man's behavior is the only thing in the universe that is not
> > deterministic?
> >
> > If not, since you've said a cat cannot respond to Dynamic Quality, how is
> > his behavior "free"? Or is your cat governed strictly by deterministic laws?
> >
> > Or are you going to say now, and agree with me, that your cat can indeed
> > respond to DQ (making it "free" from deterministic laws, albeit "less free"
> > than man whose respond to DQ includes social and intellectual level
> > affordances)?
> >
> > So which is it? Is your cat's behavior "free"? If so, is it because it can
> > "follow Dynamic Quality"? And if not, how else can it be "free"?

Which is it? I thought you were anti-dichotomy. 




-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/