[extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI

[scerir]

From: "Adrian Tymes" 

> No. Details refer to what can be detected in the
> present, but says little about future states - save
> that they comply with whatever rules of physics have
> been set up. It allows for completely random events
> to trigger different specific future paths.

This is perhaps what philosophers (Pearl i.e.) call 
statistical-causality, as opposed to time-causality,
and to Reichenbach-causality (common cause). Now I
realize I forgot the difference between determinism
and causality, and I also forgot wich was the book
explaining all that! John Earman perhaps? Or Sklar?
Bah. 

> > This is where Adrian's rule comes in handy; until
> > you can give me an 
> > experimental test for the presence or absence of
> > free will, you're not 
> > allowed to talk about it.  :)
> 
> You're allowed to talk about it.  One has to have a
> way to find out that the test is lacking.  Just don't
> continue to obssess over it once you discover the
> impossibility of testing.

In a parallel thread, in another list, somebody
wrote "If people do not have free will, 
then can they be willfully ignorant?" :-)