> So, how wrong am I? How am I wrong?
Mark (and squad),
Hey, welcome aboard! I'm laughing because you sound like I sometimes
think... 'Show me where I am wrong or agree and be done with this!'
To start, I completely agree that the MOQ (or any philosphy) must allow
for choice or free will. It is just too intuitive. It follows that
morality lies not within the intellect, but within the realm of choice
-- given the intellect.
I would, however, like to nitpick one fundamental point...
> We should no longer look at free will as the "doctrine that man
makes choices independent of the atoms of his body." Instead, we should
say that free will is an analog to, a measure of, Dynamic-ness.
The same concerns Descartes had with mind being separate from body come
to my mind when I think of the MOQ. I think man makes choice
independent of experienced value -- his dynamic and static experiences.
It is only the _effects_ that makes his choices feel dynamic to others.
You can not directly observe someone else's
consciousness/choices/preferences. There can only be inference. Yet,
value is known directly. There is a mind/value dualism problem that
needs explaining.
I would like to go into this much deeper. Let me know your thoughts...
RJS
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:45 GMT