2009/9/2 Rex Allen <rexallen314.domain.name.hidden>:
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:13 AM, David Nyman<david.nyman.domain.name.hidden> wrote:
>>
>> I think his exploration of
>> the constraints on our actions in "Freedom Evolves" is pretty much on
>> the money.
>
> So I can't comment on Freedom Evolves, as I haven't read it. But I
> have read some of his articles and seen him debate and give
> interviews. So that sounds like Dennett alright - rearranging deck
> chairs, redefining words, whatever it takes.
>
> From the wikipedia article on "Freedom Evolves":
>
> "In his treatment of both free will and altruism, he starts by showing
> why we should not accept the traditional definitions of either term."
>
> So, as I said, you can't read quote of Dennett and accept it at face
> value, because Dennett doesn't restrict himself to traditional
> definitions of terms. You have to interpret Dennett's quotes within
> the context of his web of alternate, non-traditional "compatibilist"
> word definitions.
>
> Dennett's main goal is not to show that determinism is compatible with
> free will (which it isn't), BUT to show that determinism is compatible
> with continued social order and cohesion (which it is...probably).
Dennett didn't invent compatibilism. It has a long history and
extensive literature.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/
--
Stathis Papaioannou
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Wed Sep 02 2009 - 20:21:41 PDT