unkerpaulie
New Member
Tim is a practical joker, goofball, likes to do things out of the ordinary. He makes a list of all the wines he can find in 20 minutes on google, puts each name in a hat, and then picks 16 out of the hat. He pairs them and makes a "wine league" (league of wines sound better). Using 8 coin flips, one wine of each pair is eliminated. The remaining 8 are paired, and 4 rounds of likes-vs-comments (on 4 facebook statuses) brings him dow to the final 4. 2 rounds of rock-paper-scissors with a friend get him his finalists, and then the winner of the boxing match the weekend before the dinner party determines his choice.devilsadvocate said:Tim and Tom are in similar situation, say they're contemplating what kind of wine to bring to a dinner party. Can your proposed system explain why they choose different wines without resorting to any kind of causal (deterministic) factors like their personality*?
*This kind of tracks back to the first question, you could say they chose to develop certain personality in the past, but then again.. how did they come to choose certain personality trait to cultivate instead of another?
Tom is more calculating and takes the matter more seriously. He compiles a list of the 10 top rated wines from weratewines.com. Then he picks 3 that seems to impress him based on quality, and coincides with what he remembers about the particular taste of the party host, but won't kill his wallet. He requests a sample of each at the local wine shop, and after careful consideration as to taste, flavor, age and history, he picks a very classy bottle that he particularly enjoyed. The bottle also reminds him of the one he had on the first date with his deceased wife.
There is at least an infinite number of ways a bottle of wine can be chosen. And either of them could have also said "fuck this" and choose none. But the process is by no means random. And neither men are compelled by their environment or background to apply their selection method. The argument that either randomness or predictable determinism is at work here simply cannot be supported. My argument doesn't logically lead to the conclusion that free-will is at work. The evidence for free-will is what I'm going by