Free Will Is An Illusion

[Gem]

Originally Posted by somnium

I know very much of Infinity. The definition I gave you comes from all the dictionaries on the web. Boundless, unbounded. It is a shallow definition but one that is accepted worldwide.

I gave you the example of Koch line, which defies that.

i have been studying intent and will for over 10 years now and i can see your will. Your will is supporting your awareness which is not free, but limited by the awareness you possess. Your statement about there being no willful activity is equivalent to a blind man telling someone who can see what a tree really looks like. It is just as I said in my previous post, which is the energy i see clearly in you, you are willing your death as an inevitable outcome you cannot and will not escape. Thus you are intending to die and so you will. If I were you i would use my death to kill that awareness, that aspect of your life, to free the energy and the will into another configuration or outcome.

I'm not so free flying with the 'you' word.

Your line theory offers me nothing, there is no real understanding within it, just you claiming that a finite line is really Infinite. Its like much of science it offers us no real understanding or wisdom, no real truth to see, just claims of proof and not carry this truth and understanding because it does not actually possess any.

It isn't my theory. I'm not Helge Van Koch.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by somnium

It would take an autobiography to tell you all of this. But suffice to say my life is an endless miracle in which thousands of impossible things occur in my life. Nearly every one of my dreams has come true. My limited self has died and freed myself in the process. My awareness spans different worlds now and knows of many feats that average man could only dream of doing.

I've lived the life you describe and I lived the life if the "average" man. The thing that I've found is once i realized that i can experience whatever i want, it lost it's
attraction. Now, the hug of a child is as miraculous, if not more, as visiting a being from another world.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by ScarlettHayden

There's that as well. But you can choose a particular reaction over another. For example, if I set a fire in my house I could choose to either put it out or let it spread. There's two different reactions there. Of course the most likely probability if I started the fire up on purpose is that I would let it spread, but there's still the other reaction and I can change my mind within the next minute or so of setting it alight.

So, is your position that there is a fundamental entity, 'you/me', that is the author of its thoughts?

It's not about determinism infringing on my free will. It's about them being different aspects of the same thing. I believe in both determinism and free will. You cannot have light without dark, right? And so it is here.

Determinism is observed in a snooker game, and choice is experience in life, but free will is a conceptual construct that is assumed based on the experience of choosing.

Yes, there is. But I still choose.

How do do you know that 'you' choose?

There's no doubt at all that choices are made, and I'm merely inquiring if there is an entity apart from thought that is the author of thoughts and the chooser of choices.

Once a reaction happens we can't choose anything else, but who's to say the reaction is even happening to or emanating from you? Who's to say it's not happening or emanating from anything but you?

I think what we call 'you' or 'me' or 'I' is a complex subject, and free will is merely conceptual, so it can't actually apply to anything real. Free will is a symbolic gesture the refers to an entity who posses the ability to choose, and choose in an unfettered way... but then we speak of reaction, and we know what that is because we experience the reactivity within our own minds. We say 'I react' but reaction doesn't occur unless the thought 'I' occurs. The body has reflexes, but 'I have reactions'.

I do not claim to know the truth. I think that should be obvious by my signature. I only claim to know what I have experienced personally.

All I'm saying in that regard is, I don't think experience actually implies free will. The experience reveals that choices are made, but that doesn't imply anything. We invent the concept of free will as a symbol to represent the experience, but then the entity (if it exists) can't actually have what is only symbolic.

What I mentioned about willingness doesn't mean there are no choices, or course there are choices, but to possess an ability to choose... what exactly is that entity? Is it also a concept constructed of other concepts like free will... the conceptual I that appears when I have a reaction?

If there is a willingness, then there is no cause to react, this is happening, lets watch it changing, but if I react I make a willful gesture and affect the environment... so this thing that say's I have free will is little more that reactivity in the mind, and that thought progression can be see to play out... yet, the awareness of it has no purpose to fulfill and no cause to exert will it doesn't even differentiate a my awareness and a your awareness, there is awareness of an individual, at least in the physical, but not an individual awareness, it's a singular function and the same for exeryone. The things we are aware of, are of course, different, but the presence of conscoiusness is universal to all.

This begins to make the edges of surity a little bit blurred. I mean, I have no freakin' idea... and that's why I find that people who say their experience is validation for knowing things like free will or if we choose our reality a little bit 'know it all'.

Of course it's fair to say the choices are formative of our experience, because we decide what to do and do it, but we don't even identify this thing called 'we', and are left without the very foundation of all that we (supposedly) know.

Hehehe rambling... Nice sig.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Capacity

I've lived the life you describe and I lived the life if the "average" man. The thing that I've found is once i realized that i can experience whatever i want, it lost it's
attraction. Now, the hug of a child is as miraculous, if not more, as visiting a being from another world.

Now you're speakin' my language!

[LadyMay]

Originally Posted by Gem

So, is your position that there is a fundamental entity, 'you/me', that is the author of its thoughts?

Determinism is observed in a snooker game, and choice is experience in life, but free will is a conceptual construct that is assumed based on the experience of choosing.

Yes and no..

How do do you know that 'you' choose?

There's no doubt at all that choices are made, and I'm merely inquiring if there is an entity apart from thought that is the author of thoughts and the chooser of choices.

I just know. It's not something I can explain or philosophize. That's not really an argument I realize so I'll stay away from trying to prove it to anyone. We all form our own understandings anyway.

In regards to the second part, how do you feel about Descartes statement "I think therefore I am"? What are your thoughts on that?

I think what we call 'you' or 'me' or 'I' is a complex subject, and free will is merely conceptual, so it can't actually apply to anything real. Free will is a symbolic gesture the refers to an entity who posses the ability to choose, and choose in an unfettered way... but then we speak of reaction, and we know what that is because we experience the reactivity within our own minds. We say 'I react' but reaction doesn't occur unless the thought 'I' occurs. The body has reflexes, but 'I have reactions'.

Where do you get this idea from that free will is merely conceptual? Explain that to me first.

As for the rest.. I have reactions but I am not the I who is having the reactions.

And to me there is nothing complex about 'you', 'me', or 'I', these are just labels to identify apparent separations.

All I'm saying in that regard is, I don't think experience actually implies free will. The experience reveals that choices are made, but that doesn't imply anything. We invent the concept of free will as a symbol to represent the experience, but then the entity (if it exists) can't actually have what is only symbolic.

What I mentioned about willingness doesn't mean there are no choices, or course there are choices, but to possess an ability to choose... what exactly is that entity? Is it also a concept constructed of other concepts like free will... the conceptual I that appears when I have a reaction?

If there is a willingness, then there is no cause to react, this is happening, lets watch it changing, but if I react I make a willful gesture and affect the environment... so this thing that say's I have free will is little more that reactivity in the mind, and that thought progression can be see to play out... yet, the awareness of it has no purpose to fulfill and no cause to exert will it doesn't even differentiate a my awareness and a your awareness, there is awareness of an individual, at least in the physical, but not an individual awareness, it's a singular function and the same for exeryone. The things we are aware of, are of course, different, but the presence of conscoiusness is universal to all.

This begins to make the edges of surity a little bit blurred. I mean, I have no freakin' idea... and that's why I find that people who say their experience is validation for knowing things like free will or if we choose our reality a little bit 'know it all'.

Of course it's fair to say the choices are formative of our experience, because we decide what to do and do it, but we don't even identify this thing called 'we', and are left without the very foundation of all that we (supposedly) know.

Hehehe rambling... Nice sig.

Nope, experience does not imply free will. I am perfectly aware that my experiences were deterministic in nature. They were meant to happen. At the same time they were meant to happen because I wanted them to happen. I chose for them to happen. They wouldn't have happened otherwise.

You're asking questions that are far beyond the realm of philosophizing. This is the problem. You can't understand everything with your mind. And I can't explain it to you for the exact same reason.

I'm sorry I don't have much of a counter argument for you.. but I'm sure your questions will lead you to an understanding eventually.

[Gem]

Descartes said something like, "The proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true each time it is expressed by me or conceived in my mind"

I can say 'I just know', too... and I know that we don't actually act wilfully, but in terms of being conceived in our minds, it's like 'I' have 'free will' and 'I' choose 'my' reality. It's like a thought in passing.

Simple. The experience of choice is a reality, and free will is assumed based on the experience, therefore free will is symbolic concept that pertains to the experience of choice.

The I that exists each time it is conceived in the mind.

The last statement is like a superiority strategy.

Originally Posted by ScarlettHayden

Yes and no..

Or maybe.

I just know. It's not something I can explain or philosophize. That's not really an argument I realize so I'll stay away from trying to prove it to anyone. We all form our own understandings anyway.

In regards to the second part, how do you feel about Descartes statement "I think therefore I am"? What are your thoughts on that?



Where do you get this idea from that free will is merely conceptual? Explain that to me first.

As for the rest.. I have reactions but I am not the I who is having the reactions.

And to me there is nothing complex about 'you', 'me', or 'I', these are just labels to identify apparent separations.



Nope, experience does not imply free will. I am perfectly aware that my experiences were deterministic in nature. They were meant to happen. At the same time they were meant to happen because I wanted them to happen. I chose for them to happen. They wouldn't have happened otherwise.

You're asking questions that are far beyond the realm of philosophizing. This is the problem. You can't understand everything with your mind. And I can't explain it to you for the exact same reason.

I'm sorry I don't have much of a counter argument for you.. but I'm sure your questions will lead you to an understanding eventually.

[LadyMay]

Originally Posted by Gem

The last statement is like a superiority strategy.

Perception... the greatest gift and yet entirely inaccurate. How do we completely escape the chains of perception? That is what I want to know. But then what happens to the gift? Perhaps it's all just an illusion..

Descartes said something like, "The proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true each time it is expressed by me or conceived in my mind"

I can say 'I just know', too... and I know that we don't actually act wilfully, but in terms of being conceived in our minds, it's like 'I' have 'free will' and 'I' choose 'my' reality. It's like a thought in passing.

Simple. The experience of choice is a reality, and free will is assumed based on the experience, therefore free will is symbolic concept that pertains to the experience of choice.

Again, we come back to the mind. The mind is the greatest illusion of them all..

"We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them" -Einstein.

Originally Posted by Capacity

I've lived the life you describe and I lived the life if the "average" man. The thing that I've found is once i realized that i can experience whatever i want, it lost it's
attraction. Now, the hug of a child is as miraculous, if not more, as visiting a being from another world.

Now I don't entirely believe you here. When you can experience anything you want would really want to experience the loss of your joy? I decided to also to experience joy in all things, the 'small' things, and the absolute miracles that are impossible to most. In fact I learned how to increase my states of joy and wonder, and the more I experience that is miraculous and mysterious the more wonder I have. That is what makes sense to me. not to mention that as one increases their power to do anything all obstacles begin to become smaller until you surpass them, like death itself. Besides this thread is to describe and examine free will, not about what is considered to be a miracle. If you can see the miracle in the things often taken for granted then you surely wouldn't let your free will lose its attraction, does that make sense?

If you believe the mind can not understand things, then you should invest more power and faith into your mind. Even the channels of God can be made to enter the awareness of any being. If you create a barrier in your mind that says you cannot understand certain things then be prepared to experience confusion and dismay because you have cursed your self and your mind. This is too supported with your fixated will set within limitations that you have made for yourself. I call it dis-ability.

It is not really the mind that perceives the I or the me, it is your awareness, your conscious awareness that recognizes you are an individual entity with a separate life force then other separate entities. Sure your awareness can be made to unite what is separate. Just as understanding unites within us when someone passes us some knowledge or a teaching, they are conveying this understanding to you because we are connected. We share our separate experiences, and in the process we increase further and advance our awareness both individually and collectively. Sure we can each interpret this understanding in different ways, however one can also pass the exact same understanding to others as well. If we were not separate beings we would not have different experiences to learn from but would experience the same thing. Thus we have made different choices and have made different paths in life so one may see things that another has never seen or even fathomed because there exists separation which is necesary to produce the different ways within infinity. It is why we propagate life and spread into different paths. We are not the same entity we are separate and individual with the potential to connect, disconnect, and reconnect, just as energy can fuse(fusion) and divide (fission). It is a natural process of energy and perpetuation, growth, advancement. You call it the mind that understands this, but it is really just awareness.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by somnium

Now I don't entirely believe you here. When you can experience anything you want would really want to experience the loss of your joy? I decided to also to experience joy in all things, the 'small' things, and the absolute miracles that are impossible to most. In fact I learned how to increase my states of joy and wonder, and the more I experience that is miraculous and mysterious the more wonder I have. That is what makes sense to me. not to mention that as one increases their power to do anything all obstacles begin to become smaller until you surpass them, like death itself. Besides this thread is to describe and examine free will, not about what is considered to be a miracle. If you can see the miracle in the things often taken for granted then you surely wouldn't let your free will lose its attraction, does that make sense?

What don't you believe?