> If the processes of the brain are governed by
> universal, temporally static laws of physics, would
this not throw free
will
> out the window?
>> Any feedback is appreciated.
>> db
Peter: I wish that people that hinge their
philosophical questions on "free will"
could make sure they define what kind of freedom
they are referring to, and
what level of expressed "will" (endogenously
generated specific drives,
motivations, and intellectual inclinations) that they
imply are "free".
But since you, who do pose such questions,
obviously can't.... I shall
continue to have plenty of opportunity to be pissed
off at seeing them here
and elsewhere. :-\
GS: Curiously, the ways in which many
neuroscientists talk about behavior is not
incompatible with free-will. Perhaps the most
obvious examples of this involves "executive
functions" and so forth. But most of behavioral
neurobiology is similarly afflicted. Indeed, anytime
we hear the brain or parts of the brain discussed in
terms that refer to the behavior of whole organisms
(like when the brain - or mind for that matter - is
said to "know" to "see" to "decide" "read maps"
etc. etc. etc.) we know that we are not far from the
miraculous. Most behavioral neuroscientists want
the prestige of science all while talking about
behavior/brain relations in ways that avoid important
philosophical questions and, thereby, foster
adherence to a useless, largely pre-scientific view.
Glen
"Peter F" <fell_spamtrap_in at dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
news:3c26cff5$0$12982$afc38c87 at news.optusnet.com.au...
> "db" <no at email.com> wrote in message
> news:01HW.B84AFD3C00022CF015A25AF0 at news...>> > If the processes of the brain are governed by
> > universal, temporally static laws of physics, would this not throw free
> will
> > out the window?
> >
> > Any feedback is appreciated.
> >
> > db
>> I wish that people that hinge their philosophical questions on "free will"
> could make sure they define what kind of freedom they are referring to,
and
> what level of expressed "will" (endogenously generated specific drives,
> motivations, and intellectual inclinations) that they imply are "free".
>> But since you, who do pose such questions, obviously can't.... I shall
> continue to have plenty of opportunity to be pissed off at seeing them
here
> and elsewhere. :-\
>> Peter
>>
