I would like to see you apply this to a soldier who kills and a murderer at large. Society encourages/trains one and incarcerates the other. (One could also compare a elegant swindler and a thief.)
How do you define normal and rational? Who sets the values? It has been said that one's emotional nature is set at about age seven and the brain by mid-twenties. How does this figure into one's "nature"? Is a controlled nature authentic or fake? (A deranged addict vs. a calmed highly medicated fuzzy-wuzzy, for instance.) Is it possible to have several natures within one being- expressed or repressed based on circumstances or opportunities? Is this fraudulent or the human condition/frustration. What do you think really drives humans leaving out religion and social expectations- power, money or sex? Or is the drive to virtue and excellence intrinsic or learned? Why? On Mar 3, 8:44 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > A madman is dancing around the streets , his actions and thoughts are > bizarre but whatever he is doing it is with free will. He is given > medicines over a period of time and is not interfered with in any > other manner. Over a period of time his actions and thoughts become > normal , where is your free will , Lee? Actions and thoughts are made > rational with medicines , in other words thoughts and actions can be > controlled with physical or chemical administrations. In other words > the will is not free but controlled from within and outside the > organism , and from within in the sense that your very nature comes > into play. > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:43 PM, [email protected] > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Again my friend I agree, man sure does interpret scripturein a biased > > manner. > > > Again I don't argue against determinisim, but I question the level of > > effect it has on rational, thinking beings, and I alo simply do not > > belive choice within a limitted scope is not free. > > > As I say I may wish to fly unadied by machines, but cannot due to the > > confineds of my body, however I can still fly if that is my wish. My > > choice may be restricted, but it is still ther for me to make. > > > Choice. > > > We make many choices everyday. Either do A or do not do A. The fact > > that my choice is limited to one of these does not negate the fact > > that I can still make that choice. > > > Undoubedlty you may question, what in my past has determined what my > > choice may be, unknownst to me, in my subcociouse. I say such a > > belife is grounded in the very act of beliefe itself. > > > Unless one can point to all that you say may determine choice then to > > take the stance of determinism based upon this is at best an educated > > guess, and at worst unsubstanciated belife. > > > On Mar 3, 4:52 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Man interprets the Scriptures in a biased manner , but if you look > >> closely and take into account diverse verses you will find that the > >> meaning is quite clear. Science is so advanced now that the laws of > >> biology , genetics , psychology etc. give credence to the faith in > >> determinism. You say there are conditions, but I see conditions within > >> conditions. > > >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:04 PM, [email protected] > > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Quite poetic really RP. > > >> > I can't help but wonder how many ways this passage could be > >> > interpreted though. That addition of the word heart makes me think > >> > automaticly that the power of love can move anything. > > >> > Does this really suggest then God literaly controls us, or indeed our > >> > movments, or could it perhaps suggest that Gods love moves the hearts > >> > of man? > > >> > On Mar 3, 3:35 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> I am quoting a verse from the last chapter of the Bhagvadagita :- > >> >> The Lord abides in the hearts of all beings , Oh Arjuna , causing them > >> >> to move around by His power as if they were mounted on a machine. > > >> >> You will find similar verses in other Scriptures as well if you take > >> >> the trouble to look. > > >> >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 7:16 PM, [email protected] > > >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > I think you are correct in some aspects RP. I would call what you > >> >> > call bondage by a differant name. > > >> >> > I would name it condition. If your argument is that ther is no > >> >> > unfettered freedom, that all is dependant on other things then you'll > >> >> > get no argument from me. > > >> >> > Everything is conditional. I might like to fly unaided by mechanics, > >> >> > but I simply cannot. This is a condition of my body, and my species. > > >> >> > Reason, human reason like much else about us is not static, that is to > >> >> > say what resonable conclusions I may have made ten years ago, can be > >> >> > subject to change. > > >> >> > Of course there are also conditions that apply to our reasoning, I may > >> >> > never have a larger than avarage IQ, for example. > > >> >> > On Mar 2, 2:04 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> Lee why do you choose to believe in free will whereas I in bondage? > >> >> >> It > >> >> >> is because our beliefs and reasoning is different. Free will appears > >> >> >> logical to you whereas to me it does not. Our reasoning is at > >> >> >> loggerheads because our reasoning faculties and experience is > >> >> >> different. We are bound by our reason , and this itself is bondage. > >> >> >> Where is your free choice then? > > >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 6:56 PM, [email protected] > > >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> > Sorry RP I can't get with that at all, as you well know by now. > > >> >> >> > A persons nature is not static but moves as the person does. It is > >> >> >> > possible to shake of the products of an 'early envirmonent', hence > >> >> >> > we > >> >> >> > have so many atheists from religious households. > > >> >> >> > Do we all act within the scope of Gods will? > > >> >> >> > If this is true then no religous text would contain no words of > >> >> >> > punishment for denying Gods will. They do though, it is clear then > >> >> >> > that we have a choice to obey or not the will of God. There is a > >> >> >> > prayer prevalent in more than one of the worlds religions that runs > >> >> >> > basicly 'not my will ohh lord but yours' > > >> >> >> > What is the meaning of this? > > >> >> >> > Does it admit that there is one will and that is Gods, or does it > >> >> >> > beg > >> >> >> > God grant me the strenght to obey not my will but yours? > > >> >> >> > I would obviously plump for the latter. > > >> >> >> > What is religious dogma if not a list of things designed to get > >> >> >> > one to > >> >> >> > God? Why the need for it, if all was Gods will anyway? > > >> >> >> > On Mar 1, 1:14 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> When a person thinks or acts he does so as if he were the master > >> >> >> >> of > >> >> >> >> his will but in fact unknown to him various forces within himself > >> >> >> >> are > >> >> >> >> taking him along as a current takes along a boat in turbulent > >> >> >> >> waters. > >> >> >> >> Most of the times a man's motives are hidden to him , he acts > >> >> >> >> ostensibly for some reasons whereas the real motives lie in his > >> >> >> >> unconscious. This has been dealt in various books of psychology. > >> >> >> >> If > >> >> >> >> you act according to your nature that nature was given to you by > >> >> >> >> the > >> >> >> >> Almighty in the form of your genes and early environment , and so > >> >> >> >> whatever you do it is not your but God's doing. > > >> >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:39 PM, [email protected] > > >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > Is that true though? Or is it better expresed thusly: > > >> >> >> >> > My nature has been created by both internal and external > >> >> >> >> > influences > >> >> >> >> > yet is still my nature, and thus is me? > > >> >> >> >> > What is the differance between a persons nature and a person? > >> >> >> >> > Is not > >> >> >> >> > the nature of the man, the man himself? > > >> >> >> >> > On Feb 28, 5:31 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> My nature consists of the forces within me which bind my > >> >> >> >> >> freedom of > >> >> >> >> >> will. In that context it can be said that your nature is > >> >> >> >> >> separate from > >> >> >> >> >> you. > > >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:32 PM, [email protected] > > >> >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> > And you and your nature is seperate? > > >> >> >> >> >> > On Feb 27, 3:20 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> Whether you adapt or you revolt , in either case it is not > >> >> >> >> >> >> you but > >> >> >> >> >> >> your nature which makes the choice. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 7:06 PM, rigsy03 > >> >> >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> > Adaption may be phoney/false in order to > >> >> >> >> >> >> > survive/prosper/get along. > >> >> >> >> >> >> > Afterall, a child is controlled in beliefs and behaviors > >> >> >> >> >> >> > by his > >> >> >> >> >> >> > parents. The child cannot even change its name unless it > >> >> >> >> >> >> > goes to > >> >> >> >> >> >> > court- even marriage only changes the last name. (I was > >> >> >> >> >> >> > named to match > >> >> >> >> >> >> > family monograms on linens, silver and as a bone tossed > >> >> >> >> >> >> > to my father's > >> >> >> >> >> >> > ego and my mother's determination to establish a stake in > >> >> >> >> >> >> > a failing > >> >> >> >> >> >> > marriage.) The brain is not mature until the mid-twenties. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > We should discuss motive and its role in making choices. > >> >> >> >> >> >> > Often motive > >> >> >> >> >> >> > is not apparent until you are beyond the choice or older > >> >> >> >> >> >> > and in the > >> >> >> >> >> >> > ruminating stage. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > Women developed manipulation to an art form. Power is > >> >> >> >> >> >> > another > >> >> >> >> >> >> > important element in choice. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > It is human to try various adaptions on for size. I > >> >> >> >> >> >> > thought of a line > >> >> >> >> >> >> > the other day: I tried on sin but found it unbecoming. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > Some conditions are beyond human choice and adaption- > >> >> >> >> >> >> > violent acts of > >> >> >> >> >> >> > Nature, war zones, political and social clamps, etc. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > If the more capable individual has adapted to baser > >> >> >> >> >> >> > systems, where's > >> >> >> >> >> >> > the courage or intelligence? > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Feb 26, 11:48 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> It is in the nature of an organism to adapt to his > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> environment , > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> whether it is conscious or unconscious. The more capable > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> an organism > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> the better its coping behaviour and adaptability , that > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> which you > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> cannot change you adapt to. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 11:00 AM, rigsy03 > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > So is morality/religion a means/tool of adaptation? > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Feb 26, 9:17 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> It depends upon man's nature and the opportunities in > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> his environment > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> that result in successive environments. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 6:36 AM, kenny > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > "and how shall man hope to see himself as nature > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > made him, across all > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > the changes which the succession of place and time > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > must have produced > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > in his original composition". rousseau > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Feb 25, 9:32 am, RP Singh <[email protected]> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> We have choice but it is limited by our > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> motivational forces. We go to > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> a restaurant and order food by choice but > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> according to our taste buds > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> or health habits. Our freedom is bound by many > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> factors , some of which > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> we are not even aware of. The choice is ours and > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> the responsibility is > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ours but the motivating force behind the curtain > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> is determined by our > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> nature. On being confronted by a bully the meek > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> among us act with > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> timidity but the bold among us act with > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> aggression. Our nature is > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> determined to a large extent by factors beyond our > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> control , we are > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> not responsible for our genes or the environment > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> in which we were born > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> and yet they are responsible for our nature. The > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> desire to change > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ourselves , to improve ourselves comes from within > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> us and is innate in > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> us , what we see as our freedom has causative > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> factors of which we are > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> not aware. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 7:21 PM, pol.science kid > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > I was thinking...it is our ability to make a > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > choice that makes us > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > moral beings....but is it necessary that animals > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > dont make a > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > choice...and do we really make an active > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > choice....and i would like > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > someone to talk about responsibility in the same > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > sense...- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> >> >> >> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> >> >> >> - > > >> ... > > >> read more »- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
