Thanks Marsha,

So even an analytical buddhist agrees that "one must" ... attribute
free-will to self.

Ian

On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:59 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  3.2.2  Role: Agent of actions and thinker of thoughts (autonomy)
>
>   "The sense of boundedness is also brought out through considerations 
> pertaining to 'the self's' causal efficacy.  For most people take themselves 
> to be autonomous agents in virtue of their assumed causal powers, thus 
> relating directly to the 'role-occupiers'  _thinker of thoughts_,  _initiator 
> of actions_.  These roles point to common modes of assumed self-identity.  
> How, more precisely, do we identify as such thinkers and agents?  One way, 
> already mentioned, is through 'this-ness': the felt value attached to the 
> idea that _I, this particular self_, as opposed to some other self, am the 
> agent of certain actions.  Another way we construe ourselves to be thinking 
> agents is through the feeling that our deliberate actions are not the result 
> of impersonal factors but, rather, of special causal powers pertaining to 
> free-will.  ---  _our_ free-will.  We feel, in other words, that our choices 
> are not blindly determined, but that with any deliberate action, we could 
> have chosen to
>  do otherwise.  The feeling that one is able to exert unique causal powers on 
> the world through one's own thoughts and actions add weight to the feeling of 
> _being_ a separate, autonomous entity.  Identifying as a (free) thinker and 
> agent would thus plausibly evoke a sense of boundary between our 'free' 
> selves and the world with which we interact (including other free agents).
>
>   "But the feelings of freedom do not seem to stop there.  Like 'this-ness', 
> the belief in one's free-will seems to endow those free thoughts and actions 
> with value.  One takes particular pride or shame not only in the apparent 
> fact that _this_, as opposed _that_ kind of action.  It is through this 
> feeling of freedom that one feel's responsible for one's actions.  In the 
> extensive literature of free-will, it has been noted that anyone who _truly_ 
> believed there was no real choice in the matter --- that our every action was 
> determined from birth --- would not fully experience the emotions of pride, 
> shame, guilt, praise or blame, to name but a few.  It seems that for these 
> emotions to be properly felt, one must, at _some_ level, buy into the 
> assumption that it is possible to have chosen differently.  We do not usually 
> attribute heartfelt praise or blame to behaviours we perceive as mechanistic 
> or random (if we do, then it tends to be through unconsciously 
> anthropomorphising in
>  animate objects such as stalling cars and red traffic lights!).  The 
> emotional investment in the outcome of one's actions serves to intensify the 
> sense of boundary between self-as-agent and other (or self-as-thinker and 
> other).   The associated roles, 'thinker of thoughts' and 'initiator of 
> actions' thus depict distinct and repetitive _modes_ in which we, as 
> subjects, identify with things (in the capacity of these roles), underscoring 
> the sense of boundary between self and other.  And the associated sense of 
> boundedness is best evidenced through the value we attach to being, it would 
> seem, a free author of our actions.
>
>   "The reflections developed in this discussion on both 'this-ness' and 
> 'autonomy' (introduced by Baron) help to illuminate, from two different 
> angles, the sense of ontological uniqueness that we have.  The sense of being 
> a uniquely separate _thing_, whether as something special, or as something 
> autonomous, is strong evidence for our reflexive ascription of boundedness to 
> the self we assume we are.  We can also note its connection with the 
> long-running debate on free-will, and with the fact that many philosophers, 
> such as Kant and Frankfurt, have chosen to identify the most central aspect 
> of our 'selves' with 'the will'."
>
>        (Albahari, Miri, 'Analytical Buddhism: The Two-tiered Illusion of Self 
> ', pp.96-97)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> 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

Reply via email to