Re: Determinism

From: Aaron Agassi (agassi@erols.com)
Date: Sun Apr 08 2001 - 17:15:14 BST

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Determinism"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id RAA14517 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 8 Apr 2001 17:23:46 +0100
    Message-ID: <00cc01c0c047$18c441e0$5eaefea9@rcn.com>
    From: "Aaron Agassi" <agassi@erols.com>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745D5E@inchna.stir.ac.uk> <00f801c0bcfe$47cff520$5eaefea9@rcn.com> <000901c0c014$bf6f5f80$8d08bed4@default>
    Subject: Re: Determinism
    Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2001 12:15:14 -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: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2001 6:14 AM
    Subject: Re: Determinism

    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: Aaron Agassi <agassi@erols.com>
    > To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    > Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 1:56 PM
    > Subject: Re: Determinism
    >
    >
    > > Why does perfect knowledge negate freedom?
    > > More precisely, perfect knowledge would negate choice. Because the more
    > one
    > > knows, this tends to narrow one's choices. -Down to the one optimal
    > > decision, given adequate knowledge. And perfect knowledge would
    certainly
    > be
    > > adequate!
    >
    > << Just buzzin ' in here,
    >
    > Just a question, if you write perfect knowledge would negate choise, is
    > that than the choise you can or would or should make, or do you mean
    > that by having perfect knowledge that you negate the choises of others !?

    I was referring to one's own choices, always narrowed down to the one
    optimum decision, as perfect knowledge entails complete freedom from doubt.

    > IMO, the second is some what closer to some truth, because people
    > with perfect knowledge can not only perfect predict the outcome of what-
    > ever system and thereby the possible behavior of those involved but have
    > than also the power to " change " in their favor the system.
    >
    > I have doubts that people with perfect knowledge would shown predictable
    > behavior in the first place. In your comments to Vincent you wrote that
    > freedom is characterized by predictable behavior, but that only counts
    > for those on the bottom of the latter...for those who are ( by their own
    > freedom or by their own free will) than be called predictable.
    > But who will " control " those with the perfect knowledge?
    > Dissipations and excesses will be there forever.
    >
    Are you posing the question of a chess game between two people each with
    perfect knowledge? Otherwise, I don't understand.

    > Best
    >
    > Kenneth
    >
    > ( I am, because we are) free
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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 : Sun Apr 08 2001 - 17:26:32 BST