[MD] Free Will

[Dan Glover]

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 9:35 AM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dan said to Steve:
> .., I tend to agree with you that there is no need to equate morality and causality. I addressed this to dmb but he didn't respond, at least not that I noticed.
>
>
>
> dmb says:
> I don't know if anyone equated morality and causality. I've been saying the traditional version of determinism is predicated on the extension of causality into the area of human action and thereby PRECLUDES morality. This is how determinism is framed in every source I've checked, including Pirsig description of the classic dilemma. In this standard framing, freedom and morality go out the window, rules out morality and freedom, which is the opposite of equating morality and causality.
> That, I keep saying, is WHY Pirsig REPLACES causality with patterns of preference, because that switch denies the central premise of scientific determinism. It takes the law-like mechanical obedience out of the picture even at the "physical" level and even less so for evolved creatures like us. This switch introduces choice even among the most predictable and regular patterns we know of and the range of freedom only increases from there.
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>