[MD] "Could have acted differently" v. "the extent to which we perceive DQ"

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 8:49 AM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
> [Dan]
> Yes, I would say that free will and "could have acted differently" are both
> static quality illusions in the MOQ.
>
> [Arlo]
> I don't think they are illusions, I'd say they are patterns of value by which
> we understand and mediate experience.

Dan:

I would say they are both.

>
> [Dan]
> You seem to be asking if there is some way of going back for a re-do. There
> isn't.
>
> [Arlo]
> I agree, but I think "could've" is a bit more powerful than after-the-fact
> poetic rumination. What temporal abstraction allows us to do is to coordinate
> our activity in the face of an oncoming stream of experience that we often
> perceive as markedly similar to our catalog of symbolically represented
> "history".
>
> "Could've" is a focal word with which we mediate our immediate experience by
> contemplating past experiences. "Could've" gives us the power to anticipate and
> adapt, in ways many species lacking a temporal symbology cannot.
>
> In other words, "could've" does not just look "back", it looks "forward".

Dan:

That's a good point and if used properly a good tool. There is value
in expecting future experience will coordinate with past experience. I
think my point could be seen as more along the lines of when the
future doesn't conform to our past expectations.

>
> [Dan]
> Could have beens are truth for old men and old women sorrowing over their
> drinks in the tavern of broken dreams.
>
> [Arlo]
> And artists, where would art (music, painting, dance, literature, poetry, etc.)
> be without "could've" induced sorrow?

Dan:

True. It is human nature to sorrow over past mistakes. Artists use
that emotion without wallowing in it. At least that's what I do, and I
presume others might do the same.

>
> [Dan]
> Please make mine a double...
>
> [Arlo]
> I'll have what he's having...

Dan:

Bartender... another round....

Dan