“…Nothing we do is done 'by choice'.  We are compelled by our nature
and will act according to how our nature overlaps with the given set
of stimuli….” – Pat

So Pat, help me out here…how does this form of teleology fit into the
workings of a multi-dimensional space? …..in 3 sentences or
less!!! ;-)

Oh, well, if you must……go ahead…..


On Aug 25, 6:44 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 25 Aug, 13:38, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > > Rather, what a person perceives as defining their character leads them
> > > to certain acts.  If you accept the sexuality argument, the same logic
> > > applies to any other part of one's nature.
>
> > I'm not sure that logicly follows Pat.  Ones sexuality is not a choice
> > as far as I can see, but to commit violence or not even if it is in
> > ones nature to do so, well we can still choose to perform that action
> > or not.  Or put another way.
>
> Whilst I understand what you mean, I can't agree.  That is, it is,
> given MY nature, impossible for me to agree.  Nothing we do is done
> 'by choice'.  We are compelled by our nature and will act according to
> how our nature overlaps with the given set of stimuli.  I strongly
> suggest that, given exactly the same stimulus, Clyde Barrow and I
> would react vastly differently.
>
> > I can if I so choose commit buggery with another bloke, that is the
> > choice I have made, it does not change my sexual orinatation, heh
> > unless of course I re-commit such an act over and over and over
> > again.  Then I guess you would declare that my true sexual orientation
> > merely took some time to surface.
>
>   Not necessarily.  There could be a gun to your head each time and
> you are buggering, as it were, for your life and it has nothing to do
> with one's sexuality.
>
> > Yet if I percived that I am heterosexual, you say that I would never
> > commit bugger with another man?
>
>   Unless there's a gun to your head or some other stimulus that
> temporarily overrides your sexuality nature by the drive to survive
> (or protect loved ones, etc.).  We don't read the lines until they've
> been drawn.
>
> > >    If you bullied your siblings, then there must have been a cause for
> > > that. And THAT cause was what made you a bully.  You demonstrated that
> > > you had discovered the bully within by, then, bullying your siblings.
> > > There MUST have been a mental 'adjustment' prior to your first act of
> > > bullying.
>
> > But you suggested early that the reason for the bullying to stop was
> > because essentialy it was not part of my nature.  However above we
> > have ones perception of themselves leads to performing certian acts.
> > Therefore how do we tell what is a fales percpetion and what a part of
> > true nature of the individual?  On the surface Pat I see no real
> > differance and virtualy no way to tell them apart.
>
> Thus the importance of reflection.  What I suggested as the reason for
> your stopping bullying, though, was based on a profound lack of
> knowledge about you, your siblings and the situations at the time.  I
> would also suggest that sibling rivalry as encoded into us all played
> a much larger role than previously (as it was never) mentioned.
> Discovering our true nature is, for each of us, the 'Great Work' or
> 'Magnum Opus' of the magician/magus and it's no easy task, for sure.
> The vast majority of us humans are mostly unaware of our true nature.
> And it takes a great deal of internal work to discover it.  But it's
> invaluable.  Through it, we can suppose what might happen if we acted
> in a given way.  We can pit those results against our set of
> 'preferred/desired outcomes' and formulate the causes for what action
> we will take.  Imagine how much more difficult it would be to discover
> one's true nature if one had no memory of previous actions.  Then note
> that there are some people who lose memory and are in just that kind
> of situation.  One thing's for sure, though, no one ELSE is required
> when determining one's own true nature, as it represents our
> relationship to God/the One and not our more tenuous relationships
> with 'others'.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to