[MD] [Bulk] Re: The Quality of Free Will

[MarshaV]

On Jul 17, 2011, at 2:03 PM, Andre Broersen wrote:

> Marsha to dmb:
> 
> You sure don't know...   Ad hominem attacks, and you say she says he says are the best you can do.
> 
> backing up her:
> ... Of freewill, determinism and causation, I neither accept them nor reject them. They are static patterns of value, sometimes useful illusions and sometimes not. As static patterns of value, they are not Ultimately Real.  ... I can only repeat:  I neither accept free-will, determinism&  causation, nor reject free-will, determinism&  causation; they are static patterns of value that have at times been considered useful illusions, but are not Ultimately Real.
> 
> Andre:
> The foundation of your snotty behaviour in your bucket is that you appeal to the 'ultimate' unreality of everything. This makes you nihilistic whilst pretending to be so smart. Was Heroshima an illusion? Was Nagasaki not real? Was this also an illusion?

Marsha:
No, the question was concerning free-wlll, determinism and causation, not everything.  I am not denying them, which would be nihilism.  I am neither accepting them nor rejecting (denying) them.  


> Andre:
> I am sure you wriggle out of this as well Marsha, perhaps suggesting it is not this not that. But you come over to me as a very opportunistic and therefore dishonest person...blowing with the wind.

Marsha:
Why would I debate a non-issue?  I'll leave it for those want to take a som point-of-view.  

 
___