Re: Determinism

From: Kenneth Van Oost (
Date: Sun Apr 15 2001 - 11:02:41 BST

  • Next message: Aaron Agassi: "Re: Determinism"

    Received: by id KAA02849 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Sun, 15 Apr 2001 10:28:11 +0100
    Message-ID: <002d01c0c593$4c0479c0$0404bed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <>
    To: <>
    References: <>
    Subject: Re: Determinism
    Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 12:02:41 +0200
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Precedence: bulk

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Vincent Campbell <>
    To: <>
    Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 5:41 PM
    Subject: RE: Determinism
    > Besides, I don't much like this designation of freedom as lack of
    > knowledge, which is essentially what's being stated. Perhaps I'm thinking
    > too much about the concept in terms of its usage in political philosophy.

    Hi Vincent, Aaron and all,

    << The implication of freedom as sheer perversity due to the fact of lacking
    knowledge is not a todays argument. The first time I heard this fear being
    expressed was years ago by Delors, a French politician who commented
    the uprise of the information- networks like Internet.
    People who has not the possible to get access to the information- highway
    were, in some respect " lesser free " than others. Great opportunities, like
    festivals, good books, movies, etc were getting them by due to the lack
    of getting access to the propagation ways by which those information

    Todays political philosophies are trying in conter- acting the possibility,
    get everyone on the information- highway.
    Kids, schools, oldery people,... are getting connected to the Internet.
    The government is trying to set up in every club, in every place where
    youngsters get together, a computer with an Internet- connection.

    Knowledge, as you desribes it, is IMO more as the mind stuff we
    need to understand this. If that is the thing you mean, than indeed it is
    sheer perversity but neathless to say a very understandable one.
    Intellect in general, has no time, has no reason to look into the
    of having less or more knowledge.
    Having more or lesser freedom is not only a result of having more or
    lesser knowledge or the urge to get access to it, but is also a result of
    genetic, memetic, social, cultural,... characteristics.

    Besides, if we look at an example, we see that indeed the lack of knowledge
    means lesser freedom. The woman in Afghanistan know all about this.
    On the other hand, being dumb means maybe having lesser freedom, but
    it is all a question of perspective. We, with all our knowledge are we free
    The dumb one may have lesser freedom as we see it, but is he really lesser
    free !? In his mind, would it raise questions !? I wonder,....



    ( 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)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 15 2001 - 10:31:13 BST