[ExI] free will

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Gordon <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> This wandering online philosopher and sometimes extropian thinks he might finally see the light at the end of the tunnel in the seemingly intractable philosophical problem of free will vs determinism. I think Thomas Reid had it right:
>
> "This natural conviction of our acting freely, which is acknowledged by many who hold the doctrine of necessity, ought to throw *the whole burden of proof* upon that side; for, by this, the side of liberty has what lawyers call a *jus quaesitum*, or a right of ancient possession, which ought to stand good till it be overturned. If it cannot be proved that we always act from necessity, there is no need of arguments on the other side to convince us that we are free agents."
>
> -Thomas Reid (1710-1796)

Whether our actions are in fact random or determined is as much a
scientific as a philosophical question. Much of the free will debate
is really about semantics: whether the term "free will" should be
applied to actions that are random, determined, neither or both.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou