Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cybvax0.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh
From: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Definition of "Free Will".
Message-ID: <181@cybvax0.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 10-Oct-84 17:48:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: cybvax0.181
Posted: Wed Oct 10 17:48:12 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Oct-84 01:49:26 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: Cybermation, Inc., Cambridge, MA
Lines: 19



Perhaps I missed the beginning of the debate on whether free will exists,
but I have yet to see an adequate description of what free will would be
if it does exist.

I'd think that the definition would have to be non-trivial and theoretically
testable.  It should distinguish between what I call the appearance of free
will ("because the decision making is too complicated a process for us to
predict the result, free will might exist") and some real sort of free will
("because free will exists, even with omniscience we wouldnt be able to make
100% reliable predictions of the decision-making process").

I think most of us would grant the appearance of free will as described above.
But what would real free will be?

-- 

Mike Huybensz				...mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh