Curtis, for me there is already a sense that human choice is an illusion: in the sense that life force, or whatever one might call it, is driving everything, even our neural firings! Probably even that nano second I mentioned before, when a smoker decides to go for a walk rather than light a cigarette.
But I bet that another option between theory and practice is to suspend between any theory that came from one's very last practice. To suspend in that everythingness and see what behavior emerges, see what part of the brain gets activated. On Sunday, May 4, 2014 9:56 AM, "curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com" <curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com> wrote: Glad you had a great trip to the big A ! This is very interesting and I think you have put your finger on the most important issue that makes this topic fascinating to me. I hope there is this kind of choice point and am open to the idea that there might be techniques (perhaps meditation) that can improve our ability to make such choices. And we both agree that this represents our felt sense of how things are. We must act as it this is true. But I continue to be fascinated with the research and wouldn't mind if it turns out that this "choice" is another human illusion like my sense of self. So there are two forks in this discussion, the theoretical and the practical. I get which one you are into. But in the end, it may turn out that what seemed like just theoretical information actually improves our ability to find and execute such choice points in our life. I am predetermined to be an optimist about this possibility since I have grooved that in deeply through much practice! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote : Curtis, just to add the ideas of a Buddhist, Tara Goleman-Bennett in whose book I first encountered the notion that the brain's neural pathways are like ruts in a dirt road. The more we go down a specific direction, the deeper that rut becomes so that we're even more likely to take that direction the next time. But the first time we choose another behavior, a whole new set of neural pathways light up and become stronger, more likely to be followed the next time. The moment I'm fascinated by is that nano second when a person first chooses to go for a walk rather than light up a cigarette. If we could understand that nano second, we might be able to help ourselves with addictions, and even habits, that are less than beneficial. On Saturday, May 3, 2014 10:25 AM, "curtisdeltablues@..." <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote: Barry, Your post is on point for a few reasons. One, I am crazy about proprioceptive exercises. My living room looks like a training camp for Cirque! Plus I have had to spend some time in assisted living facilities for personal and professional reasons lately so this is an up topic for me. I am still sorting out what the positions are with regard to free will so this is my best guess. I believe you are continuing to make the intuitive case FOR free will. This is exactly why we believe in free will. We are obviously able to influence our unconscious processes through such things as exercises and this will influence our future positively. It all makes perfect sense until we look at what actually happens in the lives of the elderly. First, other than a suicidal person (and there are some in these homes but not many) there is no reason for an older person to FREELY CHOOSE to fall down and hurt themselves. Second, It seems logical that if this exercise could help them choose not to fall, they would all be doing them. Last, they don't! I have been preaching this message to my Dad for years and he buys into it even. His physical therapist preaches this message to every person in his facility. But if you talk with any therapist in a facility you will uncover their frustration that they cannot get the residents to do their exercises once they are out of his or her sight. Everyone believes this is a good idea and if the elderly could truly freely choose they would. But they cannot because their choices are not free. They are determined by a lifetime of not exercising this way. (This is a cautionary time to automate this activity now before auto pilot removes this choice.) But check this out. I can only act this way myself because of a habit I formed long ago. I am not freely choosing this behavior to affect myself in the future, it is just the luck of the draw that I happened to be a skier and got a bolo board as a kid and then happened to continue to buy them as I got older. I never fell off one and hurt myself which might have derailed my owning one now. So all those events conspired to make it mandatory for me to act the way I do. So can I claim free will, really? What is different between me and everyone else who would benefit from this exercise? The influences from my past which I am not choosing to abide by in the present, they compel me. Have a great time in Amsterdam where your free choices will be challenged by a cornucopia of delights. Can we predict which ones you will "freely" choose? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : I'm going to be in Amsterdam today and thus not following FFL, but I thought I'd use my free will :-) to throw out one last set of thoughts that your writings on the free will issue have triggered in me. Probably because I just finished writing a short article about proprioception, in my mind many of these supposed neurological studies about whether we have free will link with that phenomenon in my mind. I think that the neuroscientists might be confusing the distinction between *conscious* decision-making and *unconscious* decision-making when trying to "prove" their contention that we have no free will. *Both* forms of decision-making are present at all times. It has been estimated that fewer than 1% of the mind-body processes that keep us alive ever register as conscious thoughts in the human mind. You don't have to consciously try to breathe, or to keep your heart beating. Similarly, in most cases you don't consciously have to try to keep your balance, because your proprioceptive system (in conjunction with the vestibular system and the visual system) enable you to do so without your conscious mind having to get involved. Specialized proprioceptor nerve cells transmit and receive signals to and from the cerebellum, reacting to changing stimuli (like "Am I walking on a slippery surface?") from the muscles, tendons, joints, and skin. The cerebellum processes the incoming information -- literally millions of such impulses per hour -- and calculates how the muscles should react to the changing stimuli, and with how much force to (for example) keep your balance. Interestingly, however, just as cognitive functions start to deteriorate with age, so does your proprioceptive system. This is the reason why the number one cause of hospital admissions in the elderly is falls. Their proprioceptive system starts to fail, and thus they can no longer keep their balance any more, and they fall and injure themselves. This is where the free will rap comes into the picture for me. The proprioceptive system doesn't *have* to fail as you age. Doctors have found that if they can urge the aging person to perform a couple of minutes of balancing exercises per day, they can both keep their balance from failing, and "bring it back" if it had already begun to fail. Just intentionally walking on uneven surfaces or balancing on a bongo board or a BOSU can drastically reduce their likelihood of falling and injuring themselves. In a way, this is a parallel to mental exercises like doing crossword puzzles, which can delay or reverse the failing of cognitive functioning we see in senility. The "free will" aspect of this I see is that the elderly person still has a choice. They could *not* do the simple exercises for a couple of minutes a day, and thus watch their sense of balance continue to erode, or they *could* do them, and watch it come back. And none of this requires any conscious decisions like "Oh, I am listing to the right so I should move my upper body to the left to retain balance." It just happens automatically, because the proprioceptive system is healthier. The "free will" involved in my opinion is whether the elderly person is willing to improve their lot by following the doctors' advice or not. If they are, their balance will improve. If they're not, it won't, and will continue to degrade. THAT is a conscious free will decision, on the basis of which literally millions of unconscious decisions relating to balance change. You may not find this interesting, but I did, so I just thought I'd throw it out. This is one of the reasons I'm not as impressed by neurological tests that show a "lag time" between a stimulus appearing and recognition of it happening in the conscious mind. Stimuli becoming *consciously* recognized is neurologically a very slow process *anyway*, and in many cases is simply not necessary for the body to react properly to the stimulus. So using "when the person becomes consciously aware that they have made a decision" as a "test" of free will seems to me to be fatally flawed from the outset. The example is (in a healthy person) placing your finger on a hot stove by accident. Your body jerks your finger away long before your mind has even consciously noticed that your finger is burning. That does NOT in my opinion mean that you don't have the ability to make conscious decisions about choices that HAVE reached your conscious mind. An example of the latter is doing balance exercises to improve one's failing sense of balance -- that is a conscious decision, and one's future very much depends on it. No fate or determinism involved. That's all. Now I'm off to have some breakfast and head into Amsterdam for the day. Jai and away, and thanks again for all the delightful conversation. If nothing else, our conversations should prove to a few people here that it is possible to disagree without the disagreement becoming a drama queen moment. :-) :-) :-)
