Re: "Free Will Theorem"

From: Hal Ruhl <HalRuhl.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 13:56:57 -0400

Bruno wrote:

>Actually I am not sure I can put any meaning on the word "free-will". My
>old defense (in this and other list) was just a defense of the notion of
>will. If someone can explain me how he/she distinguish free-will from
>will, I would be glad.
>
>Bruno

I currently consider "Free Will" to be a noun as in "I acted of my own free
will." and perhaps it should be hyphenated as Bruno does.

I currently consider "will" to be a verb. As in "I will the board to
break." This idea seems more tenuous than "free will".

I have argued that Turing's result re decision procedures points towards
full determinacy in the evolution of worlds [as would it seems pre loading
the All, or the Everything, or the Plenitude with all information - [some
of which would then not describe worlds]] and it may also point towards the
illusion of "free will" by limiting the number of descriptions of states of
worlds to a countable set resulting in the truncation of "memory".

In terms of reward/punishment the illusion of "free will" should be just as
relevant [or non relevant] as the real thing so long as agents [another
illusion? perhaps "structure" is better] can change from world state to
world state ["learn"] which seems inherent in the idea of "evolving world".

Is such a possible illusion, or its origin, the origin of the concept of
consciousness? Sort of an illusion or perhaps "inductive inference" [as
per Bruno] of self consistency due to the truncation of "memory"?

Hal
Received on Mon Apr 11 2005 - 14:09:26 PDT