Re: Determinism

From: Aaron Agassi (agassi@erols.com)
Date: Mon Apr 09 2001 - 17:36:01 BST

  • Next message: Chris Taylor: "Re: Determinism"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id RAA16832 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 9 Apr 2001 17:39:51 +0100
    Message-ID: <00ca01c0c113$29cfd680$5eaefea9@rcn.com>
    From: "Aaron Agassi" <agassi@erols.com>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    References: <013f01c0bd6b$21682e80$5eaefea9@rcn.com>; from agassi@erols.com on Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 08:55:38PM -0400 <3AD133AA.6664.BBCD42@localhost>
    Subject: Re: Determinism
    Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:36:01 -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: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Sent: Monday, April 09, 2001 4:59 AM
    Subject: Re: Determinism

    > On 5 Apr 2001, at 8:36, Robin Faichney wrote:
    >
    > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 08:55:38PM -0400, Aaron Agassi wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > 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?
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Illusions are generally considered inferior to real phenomena.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > I don't understand.
    > > > >
    > > > > Don't you prefer reality over dealing with illusions?
    > > > >
    > > > Preference is another question.
    > >
    > > I don't think it's entirely rational either, but you'll find there's
    > > quite a widespread preference for objectivity over subjectivity.
    > >
    > Which is quite strange, considering that objectivity is unattainable;
    > the best we can do is intersubjective agreement.

    Never the less, we still seek to improve our knowledge of truth
    (correspondence to reality). And besides subjectivity, there is also
    relativity. And the question remains whether subjective freedom is illusory
    or simply relative to the subjective frame of reference, thus as objectively
    real as superdeterminism, globally.

    > > --
    > > 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 archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 09 2001 - 17:42:39 BST