Re: Fundamentals

[David Gleicher <104201.2301@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Message text written by INTERNET:pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>John Legge wrote:

The inconsistency doesn't lie in assuming that the future is both
"determined" and "undetermined".  Self-determined behaviour isn't
"undetermined" behaviour.  The inconsistency lies in adopting a form of
determinism that logically excludes any possibility of self-determination
while at the same time assuming that self-determination can affect the
future.<

I think this idea (or one very similar to it) is expressed  well by Albin
and Foley in Barriers and Bounds to Rationality:

"[H]uman can change their minds so, in effect, certain productions (e.g.,
predictions) of a system containing human beings can not be demonstrated to
be either valid or invalid on prior grounds and no social scientist would
be so foolish to assert otherwise."

DG