META: The problem of "Good vs. Evil"

Jamas Enright thad at
Tue Feb 19 00:05:16 PST 2008

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Tom Russell wrote:

> On Feb 19, 2:12 am, Jamas Enright <t... at> wrote:
>> Bah, "free will", don't buy it. Illusion thereof, yes, but actual?... no.
> Hold on a second there.  Are you saying that human beings are actually
> incapable of making decisions and controlling their motor functions?
> That we're unable to choose the words that come out of our mouths?
> Because that's what you're saying if you reject the concept of free
> will.

Unfortunately we again suffer from lack of proper definition, of "free 
will", "decision" and "choice".

What I'm saying is that if Bob is presented with Choice A and Choice B, 
and picks Choice A, there will be a reason for this. And that reason could 
be determined before hand. (And thus Bob's selection can be determined 
before he makes his "choice".)
We are products of physical and chemical reactions, which build up (in 
ways, yes, that we don't understand) to produce consciousness and, at 
least, the illusion of free will. To that end, what we do is a product of 
those reactions, and so we don't "choose" in any higher-order sense of the 
(No, I'm not saying we are in a deterministic universe, quantum theory 
proves that false. But as for an indeterministic universe...)

So far, the only scientist-type person I've seen wholeheartedly embrace 
the lack of free will is Dr. Susan Blackmore

Jamas Enright
Blue Light Productions homepage:

More information about the racc mailing list