[FRIAM] alternative response

[Marcus Daniels]

I would say "able" instead of "not too stubborn".  We can only do what we are equipped to do, and do what we develop to do.  

On 6/16/20, 2:42 PM, "Friam on behalf of Steve Smith" <friam-bounces at redfish.com on behalf of sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:

    Glen said:
    > Exactly! If humans have free will, we can program a machine to have it
    > too (someday, anyway). And since we don't know how to *construct* free
    > will and the evidence against it is accumulating, it's reasonable to
    > claim it doesn't exist and the burden is increasingly on those who
    > believe in it to make their case.

    It feels like we are engaging in self-negating discourse when we speak
    in this way?

        "I assert there is no such thing as free will, and now I will
    prove/demonstrate that and if you are not too stubborn, you too will
    come to agree with me on this"

    I'm not attacking Glen (or his specific phrasing above), just calling it
    out as an example of what runs through the whole discussion (including
    the one running in my own head and never making it to the list).

    - Steve





    - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
    FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
    Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
    un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
    archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
    FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/