[MD] Free Will

[Jan-Anders Andersson]

Hi Horse

I think it's worse than that. I think that Marsha has an interesting point. Neither free wiil nor Determinism.
Because:
In every market research we can define a group of people that will probaly buy the actual item and another group that will probably NOT buy it. And there is always a third group that doesn't apply to the question.
Therefore:
Marsha is right AND David and others too.
All qualifies into Quality.
The next task is how to stick together.

Jan-Anders


29 jun 2011 kl. 21.06 Horse wrote:

> Hi Steve, Dave and others
> 
> The general impression I get with this debate about Free Will / 
> Determinism is the same impression that I get with the Selfishness / 
> Altruism debate.
> It's somewhere between political and ideological.
> That's to say that proponents of either side see the distinction as a 
> comparison of absolutes and somewhere along the line each side tries to 
> define the other side out of existence.
> The position appears to be that there is only free will or there is only 
> determinism or, there is only selfishness or there is only altruism - 
> it's very rare to see a position which relates to the degree of one or 
> the other in a particular context. I remember being attracted to the MoQ 
> because, for the most part, it avoided absolutes in favour of context.
> 
> Horse
> 
> On 19/06/2011 23:57, Steven Peterson wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Horse<horse at darkstar.uk.net>  wrote:
>>> So we're kind of back to the idea that 'Free Will' is an illusion!
>> 
>> Sam Harris goes further to say that those who meditate learn that
>> illusion of free will is itself an illusion:
>> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> "Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid."
> ? Frank Zappa