What's it all about? (Alfie...) Sum up your worldview or philosophy, if you can.---Al

-- Al Schroeder (al.schroeder@nashville.com), March 13, 2000

Answers

I think Pablo Neruda's poem at the head of your index page gives the framework of how I feel. On each branch of the framework we individually hang what we wish. In an attempt to garnish our bit of existence to demonstrate we are unique. And we are, just like snowflakes no two are alike. We just last a little longer, dancing our sorry dance. But Hey - - - - - it's the only game in town and considering the alternative why not walk the walk, talk the talk, follow our heros and enjoy.

-- doug (ionoi@webtv.net), March 13, 2000.

We can look at the self-consistent, lawlike character of the universe: without order free will is meaningless, since we cannot anticipate result of a (im)moral response. If magical, unexplainable things happen all the time, there would be no dreading the consequences of one's actions, because anything might happen from time to time.

Al, you seem to be relying a lot on human observation a lot more than I would be comfortable doing. Just because the human brain can construct order and explanations for what is observed, I don't necessarily take that to mean that anything isn't happening ubiquitously (ubiquitous: Mike's new favorite word). Isn't it written that Lao Tzu said that the Way that can be spoken is not the true way, which, like water, is omnipresent and nourishes all things?

For what you conclude is free will, my best guess is that what you are refering to is destiny's unknowability. You cite Einstein, but your explanation doesn't address the non-linear nature of time as a function of velocity. I'm not sure I see your reason to believe that moral intelligence isn't just the tail wagging the dog of fate. (The Dogs Of Fate: a Three-part Mini-series by J.M. DeMaties and Keith Giffen from D.C. Comics... Oops! Non-sequitur.)

It's like with Scotty in Star Trek IV, where McCoy is concerned that they're changing history by giving that guy the formula for transparent aluminum, and he dismisses McCoy's concern with How do you know he isn't the guy who invented it? And even if they do change the future, who is to say that the changed history is incorrect? As far as I know, there's no reason to doubt that the events of the present are dependent on things in an unknowable, but written, future.

-- Mike (mleung@mikeleung.com), March 13, 2000.