resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev

António Marques · 09 Oct 2014, 14:02 · from 2014-October.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: entonio at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ant=C3=B3nio_Marques?=)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 15:02:20 +0100
Subject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative
 lineage for Sev
In-Reply-To: <5436921A.5070703 at bindweed.com>
References: <BLU175-W3843E85195195E1669C4AFCFA20 at phx.gbl>
	<5436921A.5070703 at bindweed.com>
Message-ID: <CACJ=J7n+tkSaxV0zORunULt1KMreVuA8hoxEgOPxZTD=+XhPAA at mail.gmail.com>

You don't need to build a robot. Humans, animals and other critters exhibit
'will', yet to a physician they work mechanically. You think you raised
your arm because you wanted to? Nay, it was because some electrical current
moved down some nerves, leading some muscles to change their Calcium
dynamics. NB I'm not discussing the 'mind/matter interface'; I'm keeping
strictly to the 'matter' side of it.

On 9 October 2014 14:48, Gerry Quinn <gerry at bindweed.com> wrote:

>
> On 07/10/2014 14:58, Lee wrote:
>
>> I'd add to that the paradox of Free Will. How can an all-powerful,
>> all-knowing Creator construct every molecule of a human being and claim to
>> not know what that human being will do when faced with temptation?
>>
>
> Does He claim that?
>
>  I am not at all religious myself. But I know Gene Wolfe is. So when I
>> enter his worlds and try to understand them, unlike the real world, I have
>> to become something of a Christian and take leaps of faith and accept
>> essential contradictions and otherwise become a bit religious. I think that
>> is necessary when you are trying to understand a fictionally created world.
>> Intent and meaning become more important than logic and science. For the
>> natural world, I think science works better.
>>
>
> The same problem arises in science.  As far as we know scientifically, a
> robot with a computer brain could - and perhaps soon will - be
> manufactured.  This robot may have a determinate programming, such that we
> can predict by simulation how he will respond to any stimulus.  Yet we know
> of no 'scientific' reason why he should not have free will just as much as
> we do.
>
> [You could put a random number generator based on quantum decisions in his
> brain to make him sometimes unpredictable on principle.  But making him act
> erratically for no good reason hardly enhances his free will!]
>
> See also Newcomb's Paradox.
>
> - Gerry Quinn
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20141009/e3e233e3/attachment-0001.htm>

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net