[extropy-chat] Role of MWI and Time Travel

[Lee Corbin]

Russell writes

> Who says the soul doesn't exist? There's no single universally
> agreed on definition of the word, but if we define it as "that
> nonmaterial entity which is the seat of consciousness and which
> could potentially survive death of one's body", then it does
> indeed exist: it is the mind, the pattern of information
> contained in the brain.

We ought not willy-nilly redefine ordinary meanings when we can
avoid it. In some cases where there is something at stake and
some relevance, it doesn't bother me. But to redefine "soul"
so that it exists really opens the door.

Next I can say that God exists, and atheists are wrong. I need
only mean by "God" the laws of nature.

But I'm just getting started. Not only do souls and God exist,
but so does Santa Claus.  After all, Santa Claus can be defined
as that spirit of Christmas happiness and generosity enjoyed by
millions around the world, especially children. Of course
Santa Claus exists (under this non-standard use of the term).

> But irrespective of one's view on the nature of the soul,
> physics etc, I claim that "uncaused decision" is an oxymoron.

I agree with you in the strictest meanings of terms; but in the
example I gave where (for example) in the "physics" of Thomas
Aquinas both souls exist and uncaused decisions are the norm,
"uncaused decision" is not an oxymoron. It's simply an incorrect
description of the real world.

> I will claim that my definition (which I'm glad you like,
> btw) _is_ the everyday meaning of the term (and therefore
> that free will does exist in the everyday meaning).

Well, we might have to conduct a poll to see who is right, but
my guess is that the everyday definition most people would use
is that of an uncaused decision: namely, most people do believe
in souls of a non-mechanical nature, and that it is possible
for a soul to simply decide to do something, and to do it without
following any laws of physics.

Lee