[MD] Free Will

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Ron,



On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 10:49 AM, X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:
> 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's not the we don't have free will. It's that free will probably
can't even mean anything. What does it mean to say that not only are
you capable of acting out your will but that on top of that your will
is free? Free of what?



> 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.

Harris is not saying that we have no choice. The question is where do
choices come from?

> 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.

I don't follow.


>
> 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.


Whether we like the consequences of believing in free will or denying
it's coherence as a concept is beside the point of whether or not free
will is intelligible.



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


How so?