[FRIAM] alternative response

[Russ Abbott]

Frank,  Thanks for the Glymour paper. So often when I read a paper from
someone in the Humanities (and Philosophy is considered part of the
Humanities) I come away wondering whether the author cared more about how
entertaining the paper was than about its actual substance. No doubt that
Glymour knows how to entertain! It's a sparking performance.

-- Russ Abbott
Professor, Computer Science
California State University, Los Angeles


On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 7:38 PM Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Good point, Russ.  Does quantum mechanics somehow save the day for the
> free will believers?  Here is a book review my erstwhile boss wrote on the
> topic:
>
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JFqDNQ66BLDDXGS9hEfAF6HNgXe_Xhm4/view?usp=drivesdk
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020, 8:13 PM Russ Abbott <russ.abbott at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Actually, my point is that we act as if we believe we have free will.
>> That was intended to support Nick's claim that everyone seems to believe
>> things science denies.
>>
>> -- Russ Abbott
>> Professor, Computer Science
>> California State University, Los Angeles
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 5:34 PM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sure, ok.   I don’t know what any of this has to do with Russ’ lecture
>>> on free will.
>>>
>>> I was just responding in the affirmative to the apparently underlying
>>> question of if we are all reactive machines.  Of course we are.  While the
>>> reaction could be complicated, or the stimulus could be communicated over a
>>> faulty channel and thus result in a response that is inappropriate, how *
>>> *could** it be any other way?    I didn’t say anything about the
>>> taxonomy of machines being limited or any individual instance being
>>> simplistic.  That’s just a straw man.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Steve Smith <
>>> sasmyth at swcp.com>
>>> *Reply-To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
>>> friam at redfish.com>
>>> *Date: *Sunday, June 14, 2020 at 4:30 PM
>>> *To: *"friam at redfish.com" <friam at redfish.com>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [FRIAM] alternative response
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> playing "the Imp(uter)" I think that is similar to what Glen has
>>> asserted/suggested/implied/offered?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/14/20 4:45 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>>>
>>> Steve writes:
>>>
>>> < To some (many?) that might be what our collective "rattling on"
>>> looks/sounds like.  >
>>>
>>> I’m claiming all conversations are like that.   Maybe the agents have a
>>> little more state, and the transactions are less frequent.    Same.
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>>>
>>> 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/
>>>
>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>>> 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/
>>>
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> 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/
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200614/239db659/attachment.html>