Frank, Thanks for the Glymour paper. So often when I read a paper from someone in the Humanities (and Philosophy is considered part of the Humanities) I come away wondering whether the author cared more about how entertaining the paper was than about its actual substance. No doubt that Glymour knows how to entertain! It's a sparking performance.
-- Russ Abbott Professor, Computer Science California State University, Los Angeles On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 7:38 PM Frank Wimberly <[email protected]> wrote: > Good point, Russ. Does quantum mechanics somehow save the day for the > free will believers? Here is a book review my erstwhile boss wrote on the > topic: > > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JFqDNQ66BLDDXGS9hEfAF6HNgXe_Xhm4/view?usp=drivesdk > > --- > Frank C. Wimberly > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, > Santa Fe, NM 87505 > > 505 670-9918 > Santa Fe, NM > > On Sun, Jun 14, 2020, 8:13 PM Russ Abbott <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Actually, my point is that we act as if we believe we have free will. >> That was intended to support Nick's claim that everyone seems to believe >> things science denies. >> >> -- Russ Abbott >> Professor, Computer Science >> California State University, Los Angeles >> >> >> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 5:34 PM Marcus Daniels <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Sure, ok. I don’t know what any of this has to do with Russ’ lecture >>> on free will. >>> >>> I was just responding in the affirmative to the apparently underlying >>> question of if we are all reactive machines. Of course we are. While the >>> reaction could be complicated, or the stimulus could be communicated over a >>> faulty channel and thus result in a response that is inappropriate, how * >>> *could** it be any other way? I didn’t say anything about the >>> taxonomy of machines being limited or any individual instance being >>> simplistic. That’s just a straw man. >>> >>> >>> >>> *From: *Friam <[email protected]> on behalf of Steve Smith < >>> [email protected]> >>> *Reply-To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < >>> [email protected]> >>> *Date: *Sunday, June 14, 2020 at 4:30 PM >>> *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>> *Subject: *Re: [FRIAM] alternative response >>> >>> >>> >>> playing "the Imp(uter)" I think that is similar to what Glen has >>> asserted/suggested/implied/offered? >>> >>> >>> >>> On 6/14/20 4:45 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: >>> >>> Steve writes: >>> >>> < To some (many?) that might be what our collective "rattling on" >>> looks/sounds like. > >>> >>> I’m claiming all conversations are like that. Maybe the agents have a >>> little more state, and the transactions are less frequent. Same. >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> >>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . >>> >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> >>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> >>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> >>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> >> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> >
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
