Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA04433 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 15 Apr 2001 23:08:02 +0100 From: <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 17:10:43 -0500 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Determinism Message-ID: <3AD9D613.26030.655606@localhost> In-reply-to: <001901c0c5f6$ef74a680$5eaefea9@rcn.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On 15 Apr 2001, at 17:56, Aaron Agassi wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
> Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 5:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Determinism
>
>
> > On 15 Apr 2001, at 5:42, Aaron Agassi wrote:
> >
> > > Since I hold Superdeterminism necessary and sufficient for
> > > freedom, my position, precisely, is that omniscience would narrow
> > > down choices to the one optimal decision. Never the less, this
> > > would be, indeed, empowering, of course.
> > >
> > Such as which one of the two perfectly suited values one should use
> > to solve a given quadratic equation? Degrees of perfection; hmmm.
> > Perhaps you're ready to count fractal iterations of angels on the
> > heads of pins.
> >
> I have already answered that for you:
>
> An omniscient mathematician would not only have every sufficient
> answer to the equation, but would also predict every real world
> ramification of the choice. Which value takes up less space on the
> black board. Which value helps the best illustration of the principle
> under examination. Which response will be deemed cleverest to impress
> that cute mathematician of the appropriate sex. And so on.
>
But the only condition set was "which solved the equation." Your
other ones are being pulled out of thin air.
>
> But if it there ever could be such a situation where further narrowing
> down of the correct response would make no difference, then,
> obviously, that residual choice which makes no difference would
> scarcely further empower. And the choice, however arbitrary, would
> still be determined, by whatever criteria of preference or whatever
> process.
>
In other words, even though you do not and cannot know a priori
that the choice of one perfect equal over another is causally
determined (from the first flush of the newly born Big Bang), you
navertheless have an unshakeable faith that it must be so. How
touching.
>
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 15 2001 - 23:11:23 BST