Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP Path: utzoo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!flink From: flink@umcp-cs.UUCP (Paul V. Torek) Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Example of my usage of "free" by someone else Message-ID: <891@umcp-cs.UUCP> Date: Wed, 17-Jul-85 20:35:28 EDT Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.891 Posted: Wed Jul 17 20:35:28 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 18-Jul-85 08:49:15 EDT Distribution: na Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD Lines: 38 Rich Rosen asks: >Can you show definitions of free based on rational evaluation, or show >examples of such usage other than your own? Here's an interview with evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers in *Omni* magazine, July 1985, p. 80: Omni: Is free will in human beings an acceptable notion to a sociobiologist? Trivers: What do you mean by free will? There's no question that human beings have been selected to review our behavior and alter it in ways that seem desirable. There's no question that we sometimes set ourselves against ourselves, so to speak, and try to mold ourselves differently from the ways we are naturally inclined. Apparently, individuals who have reviewed their own behavior and sometimes acted in opposition to it have outreproduced those who haven't bothered. So evidently, natural selection has found useful a degree of self-consciousness and ability to redirect our efforts. If that's what you mean by free will, fine with me. On the other hand, nat all self-review is necessarily being directed by the individual. You have to bear in mind that we all have the potential to be parasitized by others, so to speak, [...] Trivers goes on to explain how parents and others can influence an individual's behavior, but nowhere does he mention an alternative conception of free will (re: "if that's what you mean by free will, fine with me") involving non-causality, "external agent", or such. In fairness to Rich's position though, I should note that I recently found a dictionary definition that gives at least some support to his view; it referred to "choice not constrained by divinely imposed or physical necessity ... or partly exempt from causal law" (not an exact quote). --Paul V Torek "Waaahhh! Mommy! Paul took my bubble gum and stuck it in his hair!"