Re: Answer to Eugenie Scott's views

John W Burgeson (
Sun, 22 Mar 1998 15:48:29 -0700

Will -- this adds to my last post and requires no answer. I mean it
only to illustrate.


>>The existentialists, who were ardent atheists because of the carnage
they lived
through in WW I, argued that the only way to achieve meaning in our
meaningless lives was to define ourselves by our free decisions.>>

As atheists, they were following the only path possible.

>> Hopfield was sure free will was impossible from
the view of physics--all the indeterminacies of physics were pretty well
out in human minds and would not give free will in any case.>>

I would agree, of course. "From the viewpoint of physics" is the
phrase. If free will exists, it must involve non-natural causation at
some level.

>>What I detest about free will is the hate, revenge and ghastly
punishment that
flows from this cultural myth.>>

I likewise deplore what you deplore. But not liking something is
a terrible reason to call it untrue! Suppose there was a culture in which
a belief
in free will resulted in a good and just society. Would that, then, be
grounds for
calling it true?


You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]