Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: js1138; Alamo-Girl; Phaedrus; marron; Doctor Stochastic; Heartlander; Dataman; RadioAstronomer; ...
Are you asserting that hard problems are automatically excluded from science, or that problems that cannot be solved in our lifetime should not be studied?

No, of course not, js1138. What I am asserting is that the technic of science cannot address certain types of problems because its scope is too narrow, too limited for the purpose -- i.e., limited to the physical aspects of reality. There are problems that are not premised in the physical.

BTW, how would you design an experiment where the subject possesses free will? How would you "control" for that?

570 posted on 01/20/2004 7:58:35 AM PST by betty boop (God used beautiful mathematics in creating the world. -- Paul Dirac)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies ]


To: betty boop
BTW, how would you design an experiment where the subject possesses free will? How would you "control" for that?

A lot of hidden assumptions in your question. If free will is an observable phenomenon then it can be studied, just as chaos, complexity and indeterminacy can be studied.

The behavior of people is complex and unpredictable, but it is bound by rules. Free will, for example, does not imply the ability to speak an arbitrary foreign language without exposure or training, nor the ability to become an expert in a technical field without training. These examples may strike you as silly, but they are meant to demonstrate that there are constraints on human will that can be studied.

In the years I've observes these crevo threads I've noticed a consistent inability of some to come to terms with complexity, and the inability of some to come to terms with a central consequence of evolution. That central consequence is that there are new things under the sun. Evolution brings into existence things that are absolute new and which have properties that cannot be predicted from first principles. In a sense, the universe itself has free will, at least in the sense of being unpredictable.

Human behavior is also evolutionary. Much of what we call thinking appears (at least to this self-observer) to be a stirring of random associations that collect around a goal. In formulating this paragraph I have an overall sense of my objective, but the process of stringing words together is not automatic. Lots of words and phrases come to the surface, but only a few get selected as contributing to the overall thought.

Human behavior is an extremely difficult problem, and our tools for studying it are inadequate. But simply asserting that it can't be studied is not going to get you anywhere in the long run.

572 posted on 01/20/2004 8:30:00 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 570 | View Replies ]

To: betty boop
how would you design an experiment where the subject possesses free will?

By the mere act of doing it. Nothing in nature would lead you to attempt such a thing.

582 posted on 01/20/2004 11:32:38 AM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 570 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson