<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; "><BR><DIV><DIV>Mike Dougherty wrote:<FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" color="#000000" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000"><B> </B></FONT></DIV><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"> <BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">On 6/26/07, Thomas <<A href="mailto:thomas@thomasoliver.net">thomas@thomasoliver.net</A>> wrote:</FONT></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; min-height: 14.0px"><BR></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">> What makes a vague</FONT></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">> abstract entity more extensible and coherent than a concrete expression of</FONT></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">> will as the source of personal identity?</FONT></P> <BR></BLOCKQUOTE><P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; min-height: 14.0px"><BR></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">What makes an abstract [anything] more extensible ... than a concrete</FONT></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">[anything] ?</FONT></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; min-height: 14.0px"><BR></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">I think the answer is: the definition(s) of 'abstract,' 'concrete' and</FONT></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">'extensible'</FONT></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; min-height: 14.0px"><BR></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">Sorry to be so blunt as I jump into a conversation threaded with such</FONT></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">"social niceties" as a meta-discourse on "social niceties"<SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"> </SPAN>:)</FONT></P> </BLOCKQUOTE><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV>Quite alright. I had that coming. I think I was feeling seasick on waves of floating abstraction. But in the context of personal identity I think we need to limit the primary entity to a single observer locus and require agency at conceptual capacity (self aware rationality -- able to discriminate viewpoints and integrate them). We speak here of the "more coherent" abstract source of personal identity. I take this to mean consistent with (not just anything, but with) the reality of personal identity. I can't say that "will as essence" satisfies the constraints I've proposed, especially if it admits arbitrary irrationality. I think of will as agency. So, thanks, Mike for provoking me into doing my own thinking. -- Thomas<BR></DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><BR><DIV> <DIV style="text-align: center;"><A href="mailto:Thomas@ThomasOliver.net">Thomas@ThomasOliver.net</A></DIV> </DIV><BR></BODY></HTML>