[MD] The Quality of Free Will

[MarshaV]

On Jul 17, 2011, at 6:15 PM, david buchanan wrote:

> 
> Steve said:
> ... dmb resorted to an ad hominem to avoid having to respond to the argument that Marsha made. See below...
> 
>> Marsha previously:
>> Right.  Dmb is conflating the SOM and MoQ; they're two different
>> metaphysics.  The MOQ rejects the Cartesian self as a ridiculous
>> fiction and replaces that concept of the self with the MOQ's concept
>> of the self as a complex ecology of static patterns. The Cartesian
>> self is the problem and the MOQ's self is the solution to that
>> problem.  But Dmb has confused and conflated these two concepts so
>> that he ends up rejecting the MOQ's solution. Then the MOQ's solution,
>> not to mention the author of the MOQ, is misconstrued as the
>> ridiculous fiction. He can't distinguish between the poison and the
>> antidote, between the wreckage and the repair job.
> 
> dmb says:
> Actually, I usually delete Marsha's posts and I hadn't seen these remarks until you posted it. I recognize it, however, because it's a slightly re-worded version of something I said. She merely redirected my accusation back at me. That's not an argument. It's just childish mockery.

Marsha:
Oh, but the words fit so well... 

I made it quite clear that I find no need to participate in an argument over som issues.  In the MoQ, there is no subject and there are no objects.  If there is no subject - if there is no self - then there is no subject/self to have freedom of the will, and likewise, there is no subject/self who has a life that is determined.  The issue is meaningless.   So, I neither accept free-wlll and determinism, nor deny free-wlll and determinism.   If you want to argue from a som point-of-view (concerning a subject's free-will), please discuss freewill vs. determinism as long as it pleases you.  From a MoQ, point-of-view and from my point-of-view, it isn't relevant, and I don't find it very interesting. MU.  

And I don't remember you responding to Dan's last post to you?   Was that weaseling, or attack and run?




 
___