Yes, Marsha, This is the conundrum that you put yourself into imho. The relegation of free-will to one of a pattern is a common mistake. This is a primary mistake that the last Buddha made. Determinism results in monism. That is, there is nothing new after the beginning, and everything unfolds according to the great architect which some call God. This is rooted in a fundamental lack of self-reliance where responsibility is an anathema. Even Buddha saw this and attempted to get around it. For if one is not responsible, how then does one care for all sentient beings? If one is not responsible, then why come back as a Bodhisattva?
The opposite, that of free will is representative of the Conservative premise as opposed to the Liberal. A fundamental notion of responsibility is key to this country. However such a thing is threatening; what if one makes a mistake? And so, the pluralistic outlook is hidden with rhetoric. Even W. James saw the vast difference between the monistic view and the dualistic (or more) one. He was firmly on the side of Paganism, and paved the way for modern philosophy as well as psychology. Carl Jung also furthered this effort. The sense of the Archetype assumed more than one such Archetype as opposed to a single unfolding source. You are sounding like Steven, who contradicts himself often. He states that we "bring meaning with us" and then he goes no to state that meaning is provided us through deterministic processes. This is really the key to the argument. Quality is either provided us, or created by us. I know which side Ham sits on, and he is the most consistent one I know. Many throw curve balls, but his hitting is true. While there is no such thing as a home-run in this debate, many choose to walk to base, or get hit by a pitch rather than see the light at the end of the field. It is in the bleachers where passion lives, not in the expensive sealed off boxes. If you choose determinism, then there is no way of getting back to free will, it is impossible. However, if you choose free-will, then you can always change your mind. It is much easier to go from two to one, than from one to two. As you know, according to Tao, the Tao creates the one which creates the two. This natural order is reversed by the thinking brain. Perhaps you are considering reconsidering your position? Cheers, Mark On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 7:11 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Mark, > > Many people do harbor a deep-seated sense/belief/assumption/feeling that > given an identical situation, they could have chosen to act differently. But > the > assumption of having a free-will, of being a free agent, is but a pattern, > and is > not Ultimately Real. imho > > > Marsha > > > > On Jul 15, 2011, at 12:39 AM, 118 wrote: > >> Let's get serious here. This is an MoQ forum, we should be talking >> about the Quality of Free will. I am tired of reading posts that are >> either copies, quotes, or plagiarisms of something that was said one >> year ago, or two hundred years ago. I can forgive the newcomers, or >> the wannabys since they do not know better. But some of these >> established Qists who do this deliberately to obfuscate the purpose of >> this forum and mislead the reader into thinking that something new is >> being developed in this world, is really unforgivable and immoral. If >> we are doing an Inquiry into morals, let's at least begin with >> ourselves. Is it moral to present something as if it is your own >> idea, simply for the purposes of aggrandizement? Is is moral to >> mislead and obfuscate for the deliberate purpose of denigrating the >> Metaphysics of Quality? If Pirsig were still alive, he would go >> quickly back to his grave in disgust. Is there not one of use that >> has the Values appropriate for promoting his metaphysics. You guys >> (and gals) just make me sick. Who amongst you is willing to rise >> above this petty and insignificant posturing? Who amongst you is >> ready to stand for something real and enduring. Please do not all >> raise your hands at once. And stop cowering under that classroom desk >> afraid that I may pick on you. Really!! >> >> Mark >> Moq_Discuss mailing list >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >> Archives: >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org/md/archives.html > > > > ___ > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
