okay. it's still handwaving that reduces to emotional appeals. it doesn't contain a coherent concept of what "free will" even is that doesn't rely on the concept of a soul that's somehow interactive with the world without being causally determined by it, because it can't
-
-
as far as refusing to get more acquainted with things, the primary metastatic mode of continental philosophy is leading you down the garden path with so much bullshit you forget your own name and buy into it just out of sunk costs, so yeah, i refuse sometimes
-
Tweet unavailable
-
what, the "if people have this property we're not going to define, then necessarily fundamental particles have it, and now everybody is going to use this to baselessly assert that Real Smart Scientists proved free will exists" theorem? i mean, the question is what it should do
-
I don't need to prove that it exists, only that your contempt and begging off the question is on shaky ground. You're smarter than this.
-
begging off what question? the Free Will Theorem and Strong Free Will Theorem literally demonstrate nothing about free will other than that if it existed, it would be a property of particles, with Conway then demonstrating free will's existence by handwaving
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.