4 ms·
> it uses the argument's conclusion as one of its premises. His theorem doesn't assert free will. It asserts that if experimenters have free will, then particl
by pjungwir 12y ago
> it uses the argument's conclusion as one of its premises.
His theorem doesn't assert free will. It asserts that if experimenters have free will, then particles have free will. So if it's wrong, then it's not for the reason you give.
- danielrm26 12y agoI think he's asserting that if experimenters have free will, then particles do, which means we do as well. This isn't a proof of particles having free will. That's an intermediary step to saying we have it as well, and therefore you can start with a step that says we do.
- jamesaguilar 12y agoYou need to read it again. The person you're replying to has correctly stated what is shown.