[Wittrs] Re: On Discussions about Free WIll
- From: kirby urner <kirby.urner@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 10:15:43 -0700
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ... forwarding this manually.
>
> ----- Forwarded Message ----
> From: steve bayne <baynesrb@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: On Discussions about Free WIll
<< SNIP >>
> If a thinker is willing to commit to the belief that philosophy is a
> legitimate
> area of research, then whenever issues are raised related to these
> "philosophies
> of" they should be "tested" for relevance. In my own case if I say to myself:
> "the mind is the body"; and then, "the mind is not the body", in neither case
> does much "happen." Often philosophers of a scientific disposition attack
> problems more related to abandoned theologies than deeply rooted philosophical
> concerns, as such.
>
> Regards
>
> Steve R. Bayne
> www.hist-analytic.org
My answer was deliberately outside the bounds of business-as-usual
analytic philosophy: if there is Free Will, then we might publish a
Free Will Index and apply it as a measure, similar to GDP. We
could show that the USA has given birth to an Unfree State that
is in a parasitic relationship with the former, which is no longer
recognizable as any kind of "land of the free home of the brave".
http://dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/WittrsAMR/message/4181
In the real world, we acknowledge more and less freedom of the
will. Someone writes a will or "wishes upon death" and this gets
torn up or lost -- a sister meaning of "will". Or someone "wills"
to go to college, studies hard, creates and leads a debate team
to victory etc., but the colleges are mainly looking for money and
the family is too poor. The scholar's will is frustrated.
These are cases where we talk about "will" for real. We link it
to words like "intention" and "hope" and "determination" (also
"tenacity"). There's a vast memeplex (= language game =
namespace) associated with "intention" as there is with
"freedom". The goal of a counter-insurgency program may be
to corral those with an intention to be free, take their cell phones,
and pen them in holding areas indefinitely. These people may
well be Americans.
However, looking at the real world consequences of a lack of
freedom, eroding rights, the rise of slavery by other names,
is NOT the business of most philosophy departments.
Philosophy has found a way to surrender its backbone and
not take ethical stances that might run contrary to various
power interests that depend on the university system to
groom willing and compliant players who intend to restrict
freedoms (if necessary) and contribute to the spread of
coercion and violence in the name of economic prosperity
for a shrinking world minority who benefit from a war-based
economy.
So even if there is Free Will, we don't have to agree there's
much of it in philosophy departments. For the most part,
those calling themselves philosophers are shills who enjoy
a cushy lifestyle that lets them push words around and still
gain some modicum of respect from their likewise not-free
peers in their cloistered la la lands.
At least anthropologists are showing some backbone (per
above link). When we write the postmortems for academic
philosophy, the questions should revolve and concepts of
cowardice and fecklessness. Western economics died a
similar death, in failing to embrace systems theory when
there was still time. Alas. Heads filled with straw. Lots
of whimpering wimps.
Kirby
Other related posts:
