home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!wri!joplin.wri.com!markp
- From: markp@joplin.wri.com (Mark Pundurs)
- Subject: Re: the z/e/f's right to life
- Message-ID: <markp.728065395@joplin.wri.com>
- Sender: news@wri.com
- Nntp-Posting-Host: joplin.wri.com
- Organization: Wolfram Research, Inc.
- References: <markp.727721748@joplin.wri.com> <1993Jan23.072420.17232@netcom.com> <markp.727976990@joplin.wri.com> <1993Jan26.054635.10983@netcom.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:23:15 GMT
- Lines: 33
-
- In <1993Jan26.054635.10983@netcom.com> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
-
- >markp@joplin.wri.com (Mark Pundurs) writes ...
- >>ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
- >>>markp@joplin.wri.com (Mark Pundurs) writes ...
-
- >>>>Response to external stimulus != (reason) or (free will)
- >>>Ergo, you have neither free will nor reason?
- >>Reason and free will => response to external stimuli,
- >>but
- >>Response to external stimuli => reason or free will
- > ^^
- >I'll presume the above was meant to be "does NOT imply".
-
- Right. Thanks for not flaming. :-)
-
- >Problem: given that you're only able to determine a response to
- >external stimuli, how do you then infer reason or free will?
-
- 1. I know through introspection that *I* have reason and free will.
- 2. I know the sorts of external behaviors I exhibit due to my reason
- and free will.
- 3. When I see others, who are physiologically equipped for reason and
- free will, exhibit similar behaviors, I ascribe reason and free will
- to them.
-
- ... or something like that.
-
- >--
- >Ray Fischer "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth
- >ray@netcom.com than lies." -- Friedrich Nietszsche
-
- Mark Pundurs
-