Buridan’s donkey makes a fortune
In the book The Science of Freedom, Rabbi claims that the editing of fate by Buridan’s donkey (or more accurately, man) is a breaking of symmetry and is incompatible with physicalism.
Why? What contradicts symmetry in this? After all, it is not a tendency to favor one of the two over the other, but rather the imposition of the decision on another factor.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I was asked:
What other way could there be than to impose the decision on someone else? Even in the dualistic picture, after the fact the person will have to explain why he chose the manger he chose and not the other manger. So how does a decision even belong?
My response:
I didn't understand the question. He will explain that he chose arbitrarily because he had to choose one of them. That is the end of the argument.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
