On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 9:54 AM, <BaxDeal@aol.com> wrote:
> >while I can appreciate the sentiment that the 21st chapter bestows upon
> the
> >work, I personally prefer the darker, more ironic message of the the
> truncated
> >version. but that's just because for me, noir is a philosophy. and the
> >idea that given free will, man chooses evil sums up that philosophy
> perfectly
>
John-
Thanks for the interesting bits on A CLOCKWORK ORANGE.
I must take up your statement above, though. The notion that "given free
will, man chooses evil sums up that philosophy perfectly" gave me pause.
After all, this statement strikes me as (perhaps intentionally, perhaps not)
decidedly deterministic. I find that ironic, given the idea of "free
will." Your summation above seems to push the point that "free will" is not
actually "free." (e.g. the notion that given an unencumbered "choice" that
the individual will always choose one...how is that actually "free"?)
While that's hardly a new notion (see book one of Milton's PARADISE LOST,
for example), it does seem pretty broad brush coming from someone whose
posts I've enjoyed for many years chiefly because of their erudition and the
subtlety of the insights expressed within them.
So is it "free will" if the unencumbered choice is always the same one?
I realize it might seem as if I am setting up a straw man here, but the
question is sincere.
What do the rest of the Rare Birds think?
All the Best-
Brian
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 02 Feb 2009 EST