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

[david buchanan]

dmb said:
..., the idea that a causally determined act could count as free will is probably one of the stupidest things I ever heard. Free will is exactly NOT a causally determined will. 

Steve replied:
 Ok, that was my understanding of your position as well. But that means that in your book, neither "could have acted differently" nor "ability to act at one's discretion" are sufficient definitions of free will for you. What you are saying is that there is "something extra" which is essential to the definition of free will--that not only are we free to do what we want, but also what you want cannot be causally determined. 


dmb says:
No, that's exactly the opposite of what I'm saying. I'm saying that free will simply is the ability to act at one's discretion. If you could have acted differently, then you have free will. Period. To say that our will is free IS to say our will is not determined. It means the same thing. You're not adding anything extra, you're just expressing the same idea positively instead of negatively. Imagine if I said, it's not a sufficient definition of ice to say it's cold and solid, you also have to say it cannot be hot or liquid. That's not adding an extra something. It's just pointlessly redundant. Like I said, If someone says, "I am free to choose whatever I want, but what I want is causally determined," that someone does not understand the meaning of the terms "free" and "determined" because it's a blatant contradiction. It's like saying I'm a married bachelor. That claim can be defeated by any dictionary and it should play no part in an intelligent conversation.

It's very simple, Steve.
If your will is determined, it is not free will.
If your will is free, it is not determined.
The MOQ says we are determined to the extent that we're controlled by static quality and we're free to the extent that we follow DQ. Is there free will in the MOQ, then? Yes, to some extent. Are we determined, then? Yes, to some extent. To what extent, exactly? Depends on who and what and where you are. 

And the thing is, we want all kinds of conflicting things all the time. If we acted on our wants without any restraint of the will, we'd quickly find ourselves in very deep trouble, if not prison. Isn't it obvious from your own personal experience that we have wants that we decide not to act upon? I think this describes everybody's daily experience. That's just how life is...

"If you compare the levels of static patterns that compose a human being to the ecology of a forest, and if you see the different patterns sometimes in competition with each other, sometimes in symbiotic support of each other, but always in a kind of tension that will shift one way or the other, depending on evolving circumstances, then you can also see that evolution doesn't take place only within societies, it takes place within individuals too. It's possible to see Lila as something much greater than a customary sociological or anthropological description would have her be. Lila then becomes a complex ecology of patterns moving toward Dynamic Quality. Lila individually, herself, is in an evolutionary battle against the static patterns of her own life." (Lila 360)

"Lila is composed of static patterns of value and these patterns are evolving toward a Dynamic Quality. ...She's on her way somewhere like everybody else. And you can't say where that somewhere is. ...'All life is a migration of static patterns of quality toward Dynamic Quality." (Lila 139)
"...Phaedrus saw instantly that those seemingly trivial, unimportant, 'spur of the moment' decisions that Mayr was talking about, the decisions that directed the progress of evolution are, in fact, Dynamic Quality itself. Dynamic Quality, the source of all things, the pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality, always appears as 'spur of the moment'. Where else could it appear?". (Lila 143)
"The increase in versatility is directed toward Dynamic Quality. The increase in power to control hostile forces is directed toward static quality. Without DQ the organism cannot grow. Without static quality the organism cannot last. Both are needed." (Lila 147)
"But sometimes it's Dynamic, where your whole being senses that the static situation is an enemy of life itself. That's what drives the really creative people - the artists, composers, revolutionaries and the like - the feeling that if they don't break out of this jailhouse somebody has built around them, they're going to die. But they're not being contrary in a way that is just decadent. They're way too energetic and aggressive to be decadent. They're fighting for some kind of Dynamic freedom from the static patterns. But the freedom they're fighting for is a kind of morality too. And it's a highly important part of the overall moral process. ..Without its continual refreshment static patterns would simply die of old age." (Lila 359)