Let me add a comment to this analysis of choice.
I think it is helpful to distinguish between first order and second order choosing. First order choosing is what a rat does at a “choice point” in a maze. It could go left or right, and (generally speaking) it chooses the path of least resistance and most reward. That is the animal mental behavioral investment level of choosing. We do much the same when we, without reflection, reach for vanilla rather than chocolate ice cream because we prefer that flavor.
Second order is full self-reflective intentions of persons who justify their actions. This blog on the concept of addiction offers a way to disentangle these two dimensions of choice: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/theory-knowledge/201711/is-addiction-disease-the-brain
Best,
Gregg
From: Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx
Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2019 11:17 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: Good article on Free Will
Alexander and Peter,
I need to be brief, but I just wanted to chime in here and say I completely agree about the terminology of “choice” as opposed to free will. Probably should do a blog on why the wording of choice or free choice is much more accurate and helpful than the old term.
Thanks for choosing 😊 to share your reflections.
Best,
Gregg
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> On Behalf Of Alexander Bard
Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2019 4:58 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Good article on Free Will
Totally agreed, Peter!
So my suggestion is to remove the theological bastard "free will" from our new grand narrative.
Let's speak of wills, drives and desires. And let's speak of choices. And the identities these choices produce.
But a will is just as free as the options it has. Nothing more than that.
Best
Alexander
Den lör 18 maj 2019 kl 03:38 skrev Peter Lloyd Jones <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>:
Hello Alexander, et. al.,
I agree that the term "free will" is clumsy, as John Locke suggested in the 17th century.
Philosophy, not being a science, allows such inaccuracies of terms, despite the unnecessary misunderstanding it causes.
I think that those two words together have come to mean something other than what each might mean in other contexts; free will is the act of an agent authoring a choice autonomously. So also, it’s not so much a matter of something to have, but rather a matter of doing.
I agree, as you stated, that just “choice” alone is a better term, as there is no real choosing if one is determined or coerced; freedom of choice is redundant.
Regards,
Peter
Peter Lloyd Jones
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
562-209-4080
Sent by determined causes that no amount of will is able to thwart.
On May 17, 2019, at 4:56 PM, Alexander Bard <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Dear Gregg & Co
But why even discuss free will when this concerns freedom of choice.
Or rather just choice per se.
A will wills whatever it wills. It is neither free nor determined. The combo of will and freedom seems merely a remnant of Abrahamic religion and its eagerness to hold believers accountable for their intentions.
As in good will versus evil will. But there is no such thing. A will is beyond good and evil. It wills whatever it wills.
We should discuss a will's freedom to choose. Not its own freedom. There is apparently no such thing. A will will always try to get whatever it wants. At all times. The question is if it has that choice or not.
Best
Alexander
Den fre 17 maj 2019 kl 22:03 skrev Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>:
Hi TOK List,
Thought you might be interested in seeing this article on Free Will. Minus a few technical points, this is consistent with a ToK version of reality:
http://nautil.us/issue/72/quandary/yes-determinists-there-is-free-will<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__nautil.us_issue_72_quandary_yes-2Ddeterminists-2Dthere-2Dis-2Dfree-2Dwill&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=G1XkHpKhGuXrWRmIGwwGi7rOIn2dxfTPssg91x8Zz_Y&s=wXqMgwevkPxlORiKI1vvCF9DERz8JipCn1NW4csh7t4&e=>
The key is that there are different dimensions of existence (Matter, Life, Mind, and Culture) and different causal processes that operate at those different dimensions. Human persons are self-conscious entities that learn to justify and take responsibility for their actions on the social stage. This is a causal matrix, obvious at the present moment, as I am justifying to you that reading the article is worth the time. As a self-reflective entity, you will decide accordingly.
As the article notes, atoms do not operate (i.e., are not the appropriate causal nexus) at this dimension of complexity.
Best,
Gregg
___________________________________________
Gregg Henriques, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Graduate Psychology
216 Johnston Hall
MSC 7401
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
(540) 568-7857 (phone)
(540) 568-4747 (fax)
Be that which enhances dignity and well-being with integrity.
Check out my Theory of Knowledge blog at Psychology Today at:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/theory-knowledge<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_blog_theory-2Dknowledge&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=G1XkHpKhGuXrWRmIGwwGi7rOIn2dxfTPssg91x8Zz_Y&s=IiFJ96LfMspNssFjxCh-oJtM15aW4dOuwUJt-ox5v8M&e=>
Check out my webpage at:
www.gregghenriques.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.gregghenriques.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=G1XkHpKhGuXrWRmIGwwGi7rOIn2dxfTPssg91x8Zz_Y&s=ffVYXCdGDsdZL0AAfo1vLCZ2HLvFF5jeJ2lU6syhlWg&e=>
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
|
