Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (7870)	9/7/2001 11:40:33 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

But since your pea eating experience is further limited by all the decisions you've made before, and everything that has happened to you, I have a hard time seeing how it is NOT determined. You are born with your taste buds "set" in a certain way (determined by genetics)- from your very first experience with baby peas, to this point in your life, all those experiences and genetic predispositions seem to me to be a crashing wave of determinism.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (7870)	9/7/2001 4:20:41 PM
From: Mitch Blevins	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

I am starting to agree with your posts, which is boring. Let's get back to your statement that prompted my initial reply... >>I do believe in randomness and therefore free will.<< Message 16298301 My confusion about this is understanding how randomness is related to free will. Sure, if there were no randomness and everything had a cause, then we could trace every event back causally to events that preceded it. This is the traditional "fate" picture and would leave no room for free will. But, if we add a little randomness into the mix, then we can trace every event back causally to either another caused event or to a random event. But saying that my actions are the result of random events is no more comforting to me than saying that my actions are the result of the predetermined state of the universe. A mixture of these two positions is no more comforting than either by itself. What is your basis for saying that free will is incompatible with determinism, yet somehow compatible with random (uncaused) events?