Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA21817 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 11 Apr 2001 11:31:47 +0100 Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 11:18:43 +0100 To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Determinism Message-ID: <20010411111843.A842@reborntechnology.co.uk> References: <3AD2DB0C.10E293B9@bioinf.man.ac.uk>; <20010410133332.D1720@reborntechnology.co.uk> <3AD3A935.30001.5E567E@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: <3AD3A935.30001.5E567E@localhost>; from joedees@bellsouth.net on Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 12:45:41AM -0500 From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 12:45:41AM -0500, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote:
>
> > The only way two scenarios can be absolutely identical is if you look
> > at one scenario twice. In which case, the same decision would be
> > made.
> >
> > I hope you don't think that's a glib or tricksy answer. I mean it
> > absolutely seriously. If everything is the same, then everything will
> > be the same.
> >
> But the same situation cannot ever recur; even memory of the first
> would be too much, as would the simple molecular changes of
> ourselves and our environs. The impossible is an illegitimate
> hypothetical.
If you'd been reading to understand, rather than skimming to argue,
you'd have seen that's exactly what I meant.
-- 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 : Wed Apr 11 2001 - 11:38:14 BST