[MD] Free Will

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Horse,

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Horse <horse at darkstar.uk.net> 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.


Steve:
As I understand the traditional debate between free will and
determinism is that they are indeed mutually exclusive. The terms are
in fact each defined as in opposition to the other. Pirsig denies both
horns of this supposed dilemma and then changes the subject. Instead
of either/or, Pirsig says "mu." He has nothing to say about "will" and
lots to say about "freedom" which he would like to associate with
Quality (specifically DQ) and advises substituting the pursuit of it
with the pursuit of Quality.

RMP:
"The hippies had in mind something that they wanted, and were calling
it "freedom," but in the final analysis "freedom" is a purely negative
goal. It just says something is bad. Hippies weren't really offering
any alternatives other than colorful short-term ones, and some of
these were looking more and more like pure degeneracy. Degeneracy can
be fun but it's hard to keep up as a serious lifetime occupation."

Best,
Steve