[MD] Free Will

[X Acto]

Great topic Steve,
I think Harris is drawing his conclusions based apon the application
of the basic general primary explanation of the good, the act of preference
to defend the notion that freewill is not present because we are composed
of various levels of prejudical choices.

It seems illogical to base the assertion of no choice in the act of choice.
If we exist in the eternal action of choice we exist in the eternal action of
freewill. 

Only by encapsulating the good does Value or Quality cease to become
an act of freewill and become an eternal absolute, once this is done, yes
there is no freewill.

The philosophic consequences are far reaching and I'm not sure Harris
has weighed this out entirely.

It weakens the explanation for change in experience and supports a static
existential meaninglessness toward the good.

Not to mention is seems to be detremental to the arguement of evolution
and natural selection.

What is good is always changing. Harris seems to maintain that what is good
stays the same does not change and that the perception of mystic experience
is an illusion. Quite the opposite of RMP who states that what is static 
unchanging
and determined is illusion.

To me what Harris points to and what RMP points to are two different meanings 
with
huge differences in philosophical consequences.

-Ron