Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id CAA27098 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 13 Apr 2001 02:57:32 +0100 From: <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 21:00:04 -0500 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Determinism Message-ID: <3AD61754.17017.A8ABB8@localhost> In-reply-to: <20010412093557.A1323@reborntechnology.co.uk> References: <3AD4F065.10772.89E269@localhost>; from joedees@bellsouth.net on Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 12:01:41AM -0500 X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On 12 Apr 2001, at 9:35, Robin Faichney wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 12:01:41AM -0500, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote:
> > On 11 Apr 2001, at 15:13, Robin Faichney wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr
> 11, 2001 at 01:46:25AM -0500, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote: > > > On 9
> Apr 2001, at 15:49, Robin Faichney wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 09, > >
> 2001 at 03:59:38AM -0500, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote: > > > On 5 Apr
> > > 2001, at 8:36, Robin Faichney wrote: > > > 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. > > > > So that's > > not your reason for rejecting
> subjective/objective > > compatibilism. > > Interesting. > > > The
> entire idea that objectively we are > > superdetermined marries a >
> conjecture with apodictically self-evident > > experiential evidence >
> contradicting it to a nonexistent and > > self-contradictory
> 'god's-eye > view". > > > > Leaving aside the grandiose jargonizing, I
> broadly agree. But this > > puzzles me: do you think that
> "subjective/objective compatibilism" > > implies "objectively we are
> superdetermined"? > > > Only if what is meant is that the hypothetical
> superdeterminism is > somehow more real, and the subjective and
> itersubjective experiental > reality from which it, and indeed all
> ideas, are derived is thus maya.
>
> And do you think that's what I mean?
>
It IS the classic Plato's Cave error; that particular pernicious bad
analogy has done amazing philosophical damage through the
millennia.
> --
> 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 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 03:01:35 BST