tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post8509996934248718361..comments2023-10-14T09:40:06.690-05:00Comments on Jean Kazez: Free Will Free-for-allJean Kazezhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-29921435476664856042012-03-23T19:09:56.562-05:002012-03-23T19:09:56.562-05:00"If I know my daughter is thinking if p then ..."If I know my daughter is thinking if p then q, and p, then I can predict fairly confidently that she will think q. Why? Because the mental has a certain sort of lawfulness, independent of the underlying physical stuff that makes it up."<br /><br />Two things:<br /><br />1. If you can only predict <i>fairly</i> confidently what's going to happen, then it's not much of a law. Elihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03543293341085230171noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-36581081520611384902012-03-22T16:37:27.927-05:002012-03-22T16:37:27.927-05:00yes, but don't you think he's a bit "...yes, but don't you think he's a bit "disrespectful"? I remember watching a video were his previous book was discussed with with a stellar panel (singer, blackburn, churchland, ...) and he was almost unbearable. He's quick but "snarky" remarks are not considered good practice in the field I think. How can you dismiss an argument because it is "boring"?ɷɠʎɼɵɯɡɦɲɾɩʂʁɤʇʉɩɐʋʁnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-3264223333747442112012-03-21T21:36:21.401-05:002012-03-21T21:36:21.401-05:00The longer these debates go on, the less I underst...The longer these debates go on, the less I understand what hard determinism is.<br /><br />I understand so much less than when I was an undergraduate and we had (locally) accepted definitions for all these things. ;)Russell Blackfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-43680171266085193392012-03-20T12:28:49.753-05:002012-03-20T12:28:49.753-05:00I think philosophers really just like seeing more ...I think philosophers really just like seeing more philosophy in the public square--not just because it sells their books, but because they think philosophy is good for people. So they like seeing Sam Harris get a public discussion going, at the same time that most secretly (or unsecretly) don't expect to learn much from him. It sounds to me like his book just presents hard determinism, but Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06297159994901018071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-70086560414296284532012-03-20T11:47:52.186-05:002012-03-20T11:47:52.186-05:00Isn't this the usual debate about Physicalism ...Isn't this the usual debate about Physicalism and Supervenience?<br /><br />I honestly find a bit "pretentious" that SH thinks he can jump into fields he knows very little about (e.g. morality with his previous book, now free will) and put aside all the existing literature, do a little handwaving et voilà, problem solved. <br /><br />He actually wrote things like "I am ʟʋɥɑɻʣɝʓʯɐɠʂʃʡʞɰʥʙʔɞnoreply@blogger.com