[MD] Free Will

[Steven Peterson]

On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 12:09 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
>
> How about neither accepting free will, nor rejecting freewill.
>
> Marsha

Hi Marsha,

I think that is somewhat what Pirsig does in Lila. He raises the issue
of free will but doesn't accept either horn of the dilemma as
traditionally posed. But isn't that the same as denying both horns?
I'm wondering how one does what you say in conversation. Most people
would probably say that if you don't accept it you reject it. But if
the question is one of those "do you still beat your wife?" kind of
questions,  you can't answer it directly. You either need to back up
and reconstruct the problem on different terms or change the subject.
I think Pirsig kind of does both. He resolves the issue by talking
about freedom instead of free will since he doesn't want to accept the
metaphysical premise of an independent agent that could be the
possessor of this free will.

Best,
Steve