Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA00174 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 4 Apr 2001 16:21:24 +0100 Message-ID: <011301c0bd1a$068431a0$5eaefea9@rcn.com> From: "Aaron Agassi" <agassi@erols.com> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <3AC904E5.10167.246146@localhost> <3AC9A569.258C00E9@bioinf.man.ac.uk> <20010403122328.A661@reborntechnology.co.uk> <001c01c0bc47$b61e1aa0$5eaefea9@rcn.com> <20010403214415.B699@reborntechnology.co.uk> <004d01c0bc87$83e4f140$5eaefea9@rcn.com> <20010404091412.B10999@reborntechnology.co.uk> <008e01c0bce3$3a40d7a0$5eaefea9@rcn.com> <20010404112028.C679@reborntechnology.co.uk> <00b701c0bcf4$e83c9360$5eaefea9@rcn.com> <20010404152036.C675@reborntechnology.co.uk> Subject: Re: Determinism Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 11:15:03 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robin Faichney" <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: Determinism
> On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 06:49:21AM -0400, Aaron Agassi wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 04:42:48AM -0400, Aaron Agassi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > > Uncertainty is both necessary and sufficient for freedom.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Just what is Uncertainty?
> > > > >
> > > > > Uncertainty is the state of not knowing. (Don't you have a
> > dictionary,
> > > > > Aaron?)
> > > >
> > > > I suspect that you actually do know what I am asking.
> > > >
> > > > By uncertainty, then, you mean measurement uncertainty, and not
> > > > Indeterminacy, an entirely different (and dubvious) concept.
> > >
> > > By uncertainty I mean uncertainty.
> > >
> > Acknowledging one's own uncertainty for want of perfect knowledge is
quite
> > another thing from claiming that, objectively, anything is uncertain,
> > whatever that means. And thus, my question is legitimate, and should nor
be
> > evaded.
>
> I didn't evade it, but apparently I need to spell it out for you: I mean
> uncertainty, *not* indeterminacy.
>
> > > > >Perfect knowledge negates freedom, but perfect knowledge is
> > > > > acheivable neither in practice nor in theory, so freedom is not
> > negated.
> > > > >
> > > > > As long as people try to understand freedom as a physical
phenomenon,
> > > > > confusion will reign.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Free choices being subjective, then, do not contradict with
objective
> > > > determinism.
> > >
> > > You got it!
> > >
> > > Now all we have to do is get it clear that subjectivity is not
generally
> > > inferior (or superior) to objectivity.
> > >
> > What ever are you talking about?
>
> Again, I have to spell it out: despite being subjective, freedom is just
> as real as -- something real.
>
Where does superiority or inferiority come into it?
> --
> Robin Faichney
> Get your Meta-Information from http://www.ii01.org
> (CAUTION: contains philosophy, may cause heads to spin)
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 04 2001 - 16:24:56 BST