Sorry RP Vam has both the wisdom and authority to make such a statement. Allan
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:20 AM, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > Vehement language , Vam , I don't think you have the authority to use > such words against others. Maybe , you are a great success but what > makes you think that all others having a determinist view are spent > people ? > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:57 AM, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > "... if we can reflect upon ourselves- as > > an object- we have created distance from those markers-determiners- > > and can choose in an independent manner- thoughts, actions." > > > > This is the kind of experiential understanding and empowerment I was > > speaking of ! > > > > Most people do not discover this. And if they do, they do not practice > > it enough to lead to empowerment. It is because of this that they > > continue to look upon themselves as programmed robots and automatons, > > and continue to doubt the clear measure of power they have to choose > > their beliefs, thoughts, words and action. Then they project it over > > entire humanity, as us all being some creation of some obscure god > > playing fiddle. Fking shit ! Such regressives should be barred from > > public activity, and sent to a correction facility instead. > > > > On Aug 10, 5:53 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Well, Hocking made some sense to me about Free Will- though I could > >> read it again. It goes like this- if we can reflect upon ourselves- as > >> an object- we have created distance from those markers-determiners- > >> and can choose in an independent manner- thoughts, actions. Reflection > >> is an endless process rather than fixed. But- "freedom is a matter of > >> degree". > >> > >> On Aug 10, 5:26 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Yes it does not mean that that they do not exist, but it does mean > >> > that this stance is as aI say a best guess, or perhaps we shall call > >> > it an inferance. > >> > >> > Yes again I belive that these markers may well be part of the > >> > desicion, yet you can still choose to act contrary to any of these > >> > markers. > >> > >> > If you are non violent you act in a violent mannor, if you are violent > >> > you can choose to not use violence. And what is a marker, is it a > >> > force or as the word suggests a marker? > >> > >> > On Aug 9, 10:23 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > We can point to many causes- our genes, mental and physical health > of > >> > > mother before, during and after pregnancy, early bonding and > childhood > >> > > development, placement in family, economic and social influences, > etc. > >> > > Even the country of birth and historical period matter. Reason > doesn't > >> > > kick in until around age seven and many early influences are > >> > > forgotten, misinterpreted or markers for life. The fact that one > >> > > cannot readily trace back to initial influences and causes does not > >> > > mean that they don't exist. At the moment of choice, I believe these > >> > > markers are part of the decision- even if the decision is to reject > >> > > the influences and do the exact opposite of the past- like a child > who > >> > > swears he will be different than the parent but winds up being > similar > >> > > or tries to out-do the parent and fails. > >> > >> > > On Aug 9, 8:38 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > > Heh heh Rigsy. > >> > >> > > > Nope I think the deterministic stance is kinda like a best guess. > >> > > > I mean for us to be sure that our lives are determined we need to > >> > > > coreleate all causes. > >> > >> > > > Besides, I do not belive that cause and effect bars our freedom of > >> > > > choice. > >> > >> > > > On Aug 9, 12:41 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > > > One's will is shaped by numerous influences and experiences > therefore > >> > > > > it is determined. Notes from the Underground-D does not convince > me > >> > > > > otherwise. I'll see if Hocking can offer something. > >> > >> > > > > You really have to be a detective of self and follow choice back > to > >> > > > > its root cause. Maybe you are too young or busy! :-) > >> > >> > > > > On Aug 8, 6:12 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > > > > Ahh then I see. I do not belive that choice and free will are > >> > > > > > seperate things at all. > >> > >> > > > > > Let us look at the words. > >> > >> > > > > > Free will. > >> > >> > > > > > The ability to chose in acordance with your will. > >> > >> > > > > > On Aug 8, 11:47 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > > > > > Haven't you noticed trying to get from A to B and winding up > at C? I > >> > > > > > > have. So far I have been going over some stuff by Sophocles. > >> > > > > > > Epictetus, Zola, Marx&Engels, Huxley and Skinner > (Determinists) but > >> > > > > > > have to read Dostoyevsky and Hocking (Free Will). I think > there is a > >> > > > > > > difference between choice and free will. I make choices all > the time > >> > > > > > > but am not sure my will is really free. > >> > >> > > > > > > On Aug 8, 5:07 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > > > > > > > Ohh I disagree with this entirley Rigsy. > >> > >> > > > > > > > At the time the Minds says take action B, then we have > made a choice. > >> > > > > > > > I question the ability of things to force a desicion from > us and I'l > >> > > > > > > > ask once again is it possible for somebody to force > anybody into > >> > > > > > > > makeing a choice that they do not want to? > >> > >> > > > > > > > On Aug 6, 2:22 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > > > > > > > I disagree that we possess or always have free will at > our disposal- > >> > > > > > > > > even the civil laws make distinctions. We are forced > onto many paths > >> > > > > > > > > and decisions- softly or harshly. > >> > >> > > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 2:04 pm, Allan Heretic <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > You lays have free will no matter how you seeing it > created. It is the consequences of those choices that can be a bitch, > >> > > > > > > > > > Allan > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > On 4 aug. 2011, at 17:48, paradox < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > There are a number of approaches to this question, > Jo; but essentially > >> > > > > > > > > > > and in summary (and i do a great injustice to a very > powerful > >> > > > > > > > > > > philosophical school), the deterministic tradition > suggests that since > >> > > > > > > > > > > we''re fundamentally bounded chemical systems > immersed in a "sea" of > >> > > > > > > > > > > ever more elaborate chemical processes, regulated by > immutable > >> > > > > > > > > > > (replicable and predictive) physical laws, and > nothing else (which > >> > > > > > > > > > > takes you back to the mind/brain question), our > actions are no more > >> > > > > > > > > > > than expressions of these chemical processes, > constrained at an > >> > > > > > > > > > > aggregate level by universal physical laws. When we > think we make > >> > > > > > > > > > > decisions based on choice, it is the mind "stroking" > itself since, in > >> > > > > > > > > > > terms of "proximate" action, we know that our > decisions are preceeded > >> > > > > > > > > > > in time by a neuro-electrcal "footprint" > (interesting work by Benjamin > >> > > > > > > > > > > Libet, presented in his book "Mind Time"); and in > terms of more > >> > > > > > > > > > > deliberative action, we are pretty certain to make > the same decisions > >> > > > > > > > > > > over and over again given the same set of variables, > since our > >> > > > > > > > > > > cognition is hard wired, and its operations are > governed by the self > >> > > > > > > > > > > same chemical processes and physical laws. Hence the > question: do we > >> > > > > > > > > > > have free will? and if we do, how much free will do > we have? > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 2, 7:44 pm, Jo <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I don't understand how some can say we don't have > free will. You can > >> > > > > > > > > > >> choose to do anything you want at any given time. > How is that not free > >> > > > > > > > > > >> will? > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> On Aug 2, 12:51 pm, archytas <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> "We have access to a technology that would have > looked like sorcery in > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> Descartes's day: the ability to peer inside > someone's head and read > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> their thoughts. Unfortunately, that doesn't take > us any nearer to > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> knowing whether they are sentient. "Even if you > measure brainwaves, > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> you can never know exactly what experience they > represent," says > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> psychologist Bruce Hood at the University of > Bristol, UK. If > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> anything, brain scanning has undermined > Descartes's maxim. You, too, > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> might be a zombie. "I happen to be one myself," > says Stanford > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> University philosopher Paul Skokowski. "And so, > even if you don't > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> realise it, are you." Skokowski's assertion is > based on the belief, > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> particularly common among neuroscientists who > study brain scans, that > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> we do not have free will. There is no ghost in the > machine; our > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> actions are driven by brain states that lie > entirely beyond our > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> control. "I think, therefore I am" might be an > illusion. > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> So, it may well be that you live in a computer > simulation in which you > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> are the only self-aware creature. I could well be > a zombie and so > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> could you. Have an interesting day." (from a > recent New Scientist) > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> We range over debates in free will and what it is > to be human. So far > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> we haven't established free will or even that we > are not merely > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> avatars in 'something else's game'. > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> I wonder whether there are advantages in > considering ourselves as > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> creatures limited by programming and also capable > of it?- Hide quoted text - > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> > >> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> > >> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> > >> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> > >> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> > >> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> > >> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> > >> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> > >> > - Show quoted text - > -- ( ) I_D Allan If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
