[FRIAM] alternative response

[glen∉ℂ]

Are we claiming some people act *as if* XYZ? Or are we claiming that some people XYZ?

Yeah, I know, weird way to ask the question. What I'm actually trying to point out is that in saying things like "communicate over a faulty channel", or landing on an alternate value for an ambiguous term (a branch in the tree), or that one agent might have more state (longer memory) than another, or "sync up" less often or with a smaller scope, what's being said is that error (infidelity or variation might be more proper) can be introduced in *many* ways other than freedom [†].

I highlight "as if" above because it's that truncation error that might be overlooked. However, just because I think these interface mismatches cause the overwhelming MAJORITY of what we might call "free will", it's not necessarily the case that there is no freedom somewhere deep down. Maybe "below Fermi", there is a tiny bit of wiggle room that then *cascades* (purely reactively) through the system.

How far down the rabbit hole we trace the error is an example of itself. Some of us do a lot more tracing than others of us.


[†] I suppose we could learn from the herbal supplements, anti-vax, and "Complementary and Integrative Health" nuts is: One person's freedom is another's stupidity [‡].

[‡] And I'm using "stupidity" in the just-defined jargonal sense alluded to above: truncation error -- aka the inability to fully infer through all the implications of some thing/episode/axiom ... aka the tendency to take metaphors too seriously ... like my inability to remember someone's name or the definition of "dual space" from college algebra.

On 6/14/20 7:35 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Some people act that way!
> 
>> On Jun 14, 2020, at 7:13 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.

On 6/14/20 2:43 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> ... if I am to decide which side of the contradiction to privilege, I would choose the third person point of view.  After all, there billions of you and only one of me.