The Problem of Self

I'm going to have to side with Frank on the logicality of the crucifixion, and indeed the whole bible. Even if I take the Old Testament figuratively, it can't cloud the monstrosity of killing children where a "god" could just transport the entire population to another place with a wave of his hand, or indeed stop the slavery in the first place. The entire bible has the stink about it of priests trying to cow their congregation into submission through fear and intimidation. I always like to use the "excommunication" example: a deeply devout Catholic friend of mine asserted that excommunication was a method of letting the world know that this person has "sinned" (meaning disagreed with the church) and is therefore going to hell. I replied that if what the person is doing is so wrong, he's going to hell anyway, so why the need to embarrass/publicly condemn him? I'll tell you why: so the church could use excommunication to get political and make rulers do what they wanted.
I'm not being derisive about your faith, Rex, I'm just saying that the bible, and most organized froms of religion, aren't the best places to look for the divine word. If you truly believe in a god, then it's just as holy to read the Sunday funnies as it is to read the bible. Smile

Hope you don't think I'm attacking you.

0 Replies

Taliesin181 wrote:

I'm going to have to side with Frank on the logicality of the crucifixion, and indeed the whole bible. Even if I take the Old Testament figuratively, it can't cloud the monstrosity of killing children where a "god" could just transport the entire population to another place with a wave of his hand, or indeed stop the slavery in the first place. The entire bible has the stink about it of priests trying to cow their congregation into submission through fear and intimidation. I always like to use the "excommunication" example: a deeply devout Catholic friend of mine asserted that excommunication was a method of letting the world know that this person has "sinned" (meaning disagreed with the church) and is therefore going to hell. I replied that if what the person is doing is so wrong, he's going to hell anyway, so why the need to embarrass/publicly condemn him? I'll tell you why: so the church could use excommunication to get political and make rulers do what they wanted.

I'm not being derisive about your faith, Rex, I'm just saying that the bible, and most organized froms of religion, aren't the best places to look for the divine word. If you truly believe in a god, then it's just as holy to read the Sunday funnies as it is to read the bible. Hope you don't think I'm attacking you.

Taliesin

I do not take your criticism to heart... I do not believe in blind faith. I believe it is an insult to the human mind. Each person has to come to the word of God for themselves and find out it is not as bad as religion makes it out to be.

Rule number one...

Don't judge the God of the Bible based on the actions and beliefs of a "religion" when it cannot be even found in the bible. The word excommunicated is not even in the Bible. This was one of the gripes that Martin Luther was excommunicated for Smile

About the crucifixion...

Knowing what the world would do to your son and the courage your son would show in the face of impending crucifixion... would you give your only begotten son to die for the world? Well... Would you drink the cup in full as Jesus Christ did or bow out of saving the world?

John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Ephesians 2:4
But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

Frank

You have taken hate for God for the love of God and emptiness for the fullness of God. Someday God will prove himself to you as he has done for me but you need to ask him for this proof. God does not break his own laws Freewill is one of the very first laws God made for people. God has chosen not to meddle significantly with the world. It was the people who wanted laws... It was the people who wanted kings.... It was the people who wanted priests... God only obliged them until Christ Jesus came and empowered the individual with spirit. Are we going to hate God because he has values? Are we going to hate God because of what priests/prophets have said God said or because of what religion has done in his name?

Not me... I have chosen to find the God of love in the Bible and am better for it... It is preposterous Frank to think that I am afraid of this God, that I believe does not mess with my free will and wants only to bless me... Don't relate me to your own experience... I stopped "fearing" God when I was 18 years old... And I have had over twenty years to simply love and revere God... I am rewarded thought by thought for it.

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

Taliesin181 wrote:
I'm going to have to side with Frank on the logicality of the crucifixion, and indeed the whole bible. Even if I take the Old Testament figuratively, it can't cloud the monstrosity of killing children where a "god" could just transport the entire population to another place with a wave of his hand, or indeed stop the slavery in the first place. The entire bible has the stink about it of priests trying to cow their congregation into submission through fear and intimidation. I always like to use the "excommunication" example: a deeply devout Catholic friend of mine asserted that excommunication was a method of letting the world know that this person has "sinned" (meaning disagreed with the church) and is therefore going to hell. I replied that if what the person is doing is so wrong, he's going to hell anyway, so why the need to embarrass/publicly condemn him? I'll tell you why: so the church could use excommunication to get political and make rulers do what they wanted.

I'm not being derisive about your faith, Rex, I'm just saying that the bible, and most organized froms of religion, aren't the best places to look for the divine word. If you truly believe in a god, then it's just as holy to read the Sunday funnies as it is to read the bible. Hope you don't think I'm attacking you.

Taliesin

I do not take your criticism to heart... I do not believe in blind faith. I believe it is an insult to the human mind. Each person has to come to the word of God for themselves and find out it is not as bad as religion makes it out to be.

Rule number one...

Don't judge the God of the Bible based on the actions and beliefs of a "religion" when it cannot be even found in the bible. The word excommunicated is not even in the Bible. This was one of the gripes that Martin Luther was excommunicated for

About the crucifixion...

Knowing what the world would do to your son and the courage your son would show in the face of impending crucifixion... would you give your only begotten son to die for the world? Well... Would you drink the cup in full as Jesus Christ did or bow out of saving the world?

John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Ephesians 2:4
But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

Frank

You have taken hate for God for the love of God and emptiness for the fullness of God. Someday God will prove himself to you as he has done for me but you need to ask him for this proof. God does not break his own laws Freewill is one of the very first laws God made for people. God has chosen not to meddle significantly with the world. It was the people who wanted laws... It was the people who wanted kings.... It was the people who wanted priests... God only obliged them until Christ Jesus came and empowered the individual with spirit. Are we going to hate God because he has values? Are we going to hate God because of what priests/prophets have said God said or because of what religion has done in his name?

Not me... I have chosen to find the God of love in the Bible and am better for it... It is preposterous Frank to think that I am afraid of this God, that I believe does not mess with my free will and wants only to bless me... Don't relate me to your own experience... I stopped "fearing" God when I was 18 years old... And I have had over twenty years to simply love and revere God... I am rewarded thought by thought for it.

Go in peace, my son!

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

RexRed wrote:
Taliesin181 wrote:
I'm going to have to side with Frank on the logicality of the crucifixion, and indeed the whole bible. Even if I take the Old Testament figuratively, it can't cloud the monstrosity of killing children where a "god" could just transport the entire population to another place with a wave of his hand, or indeed stop the slavery in the first place. The entire bible has the stink about it of priests trying to cow their congregation into submission through fear and intimidation. I always like to use the "excommunication" example: a deeply devout Catholic friend of mine asserted that excommunication was a method of letting the world know that this person has "sinned" (meaning disagreed with the church) and is therefore going to hell. I replied that if what the person is doing is so wrong, he's going to hell anyway, so why the need to embarrass/publicly condemn him? I'll tell you why: so the church could use excommunication to get political and make rulers do what they wanted.

I'm not being derisive about your faith, Rex, I'm just saying that the bible, and most organized froms of religion, aren't the best places to look for the divine word. If you truly believe in a god, then it's just as holy to read the Sunday funnies as it is to read the bible. Hope you don't think I'm attacking you.

Taliesin

I do not take your criticism to heart... I do not believe in blind faith. I believe it is an insult to the human mind. Each person has to come to the word of God for themselves and find out it is not as bad as religion makes it out to be.

Rule number one...

Don't judge the God of the Bible based on the actions and beliefs of a "religion" when it cannot be even found in the bible. The word excommunicated is not even in the Bible. This was one of the gripes that Martin Luther was excommunicated for

About the crucifixion...

Knowing what the world would do to your son and the courage your son would show in the face of impending crucifixion... would you give your only begotten son to die for the world? Well... Would you drink the cup in full as Jesus Christ did or bow out of saving the world?

John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Ephesians 2:4
But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

Frank

You have taken hate for God for the love of God and emptiness for the fullness of God. Someday God will prove himself to you as he has done for me but you need to ask him for this proof. God does not break his own laws Freewill is one of the very first laws God made for people. God has chosen not to meddle significantly with the world. It was the people who wanted laws... It was the people who wanted kings.... It was the people who wanted priests... God only obliged them until Christ Jesus came and empowered the individual with spirit. Are we going to hate God because he has values? Are we going to hate God because of what priests/prophets have said God said or because of what religion has done in his name?

Not me... I have chosen to find the God of love in the Bible and am better for it... It is preposterous Frank to think that I am afraid of this God, that I believe does not mess with my free will and wants only to bless me... Don't relate me to your own experience... I stopped "fearing" God when I was 18 years old... And I have had over twenty years to simply love and revere God... I am rewarded thought by thought for it.

Go in peace, my son!

I think I will rather stay in peace... You may go in peace if you like... peace with God... peace with self... peace with your brother/sister, your father/mother, neighbor, society and the world...

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
RexRed wrote:
Taliesin181 wrote:
I'm going to have to side with Frank on the logicality of the crucifixion, and indeed the whole bible. Even if I take the Old Testament figuratively, it can't cloud the monstrosity of killing children where a "god" could just transport the entire population to another place with a wave of his hand, or indeed stop the slavery in the first place. The entire bible has the stink about it of priests trying to cow their congregation into submission through fear and intimidation. I always like to use the "excommunication" example: a deeply devout Catholic friend of mine asserted that excommunication was a method of letting the world know that this person has "sinned" (meaning disagreed with the church) and is therefore going to hell. I replied that if what the person is doing is so wrong, he's going to hell anyway, so why the need to embarrass/publicly condemn him? I'll tell you why: so the church could use excommunication to get political and make rulers do what they wanted.

I'm not being derisive about your faith, Rex, I'm just saying that the bible, and most organized froms of religion, aren't the best places to look for the divine word. If you truly believe in a god, then it's just as holy to read the Sunday funnies as it is to read the bible. Hope you don't think I'm attacking you.

Taliesin

I do not take your criticism to heart... I do not believe in blind faith. I believe it is an insult to the human mind. Each person has to come to the word of God for themselves and find out it is not as bad as religion makes it out to be.

Rule number one...

Don't judge the God of the Bible based on the actions and beliefs of a "religion" when it cannot be even found in the bible. The word excommunicated is not even in the Bible. This was one of the gripes that Martin Luther was excommunicated for

About the crucifixion...

Knowing what the world would do to your son and the courage your son would show in the face of impending crucifixion... would you give your only begotten son to die for the world? Well... Would you drink the cup in full as Jesus Christ did or bow out of saving the world?

John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Ephesians 2:4
But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

Frank

You have taken hate for God for the love of God and emptiness for the fullness of God. Someday God will prove himself to you as he has done for me but you need to ask him for this proof. God does not break his own laws Freewill is one of the very first laws God made for people. God has chosen not to meddle significantly with the world. It was the people who wanted laws... It was the people who wanted kings.... It was the people who wanted priests... God only obliged them until Christ Jesus came and empowered the individual with spirit. Are we going to hate God because he has values? Are we going to hate God because of what priests/prophets have said God said or because of what religion has done in his name?

Not me... I have chosen to find the God of love in the Bible and am better for it... It is preposterous Frank to think that I am afraid of this God, that I believe does not mess with my free will and wants only to bless me... Don't relate me to your own experience... I stopped "fearing" God when I was 18 years old... And I have had over twenty years to simply love and revere God... I am rewarded thought by thought for it.

Go in peace, my son!

I think I will rather stay in peace... You may go in peace if you like... peace with God... peace with self... peace with your brother/sister, your father/mother, neighbor, society and the world...

Stay in peace, my son.

0 Replies

You crazy kids. Laughing

Rex: I'm glad to see some humor in your beliefs; it's a rarity nowadays. There's still the argument, though, that "GOD" made us both a)imperfect, which calls his status as "all-powerful" into question, and b) with "evil" instincts that could lead us to "stray" from the path.
I don't expect you to know the answer to these questions, Ray, but I think they are important questions to ask, since I would not want to be just a pawn in some "grand beings" little chess game. :wink:

0 Replies

Taliesin181 wrote:

You crazy kids.
Rex: I'm glad to see some humor in your beliefs; it's a rarity nowadays. There's still the argument, though, that "GOD" made us both a)imperfect, which calls his status as "all-powerful" into question, and b) with "evil" instincts that could lead us to "stray" from the path.
I don't expect you to know the answer to these questions, Ray, but I think they are important questions to ask, since I would not want to be just a pawn in some "grand beings" little chess game. :wink:

Taliesin

We are imperfect only if we identify ourselves with the physical part... but if one identifies themselves with the "spiritual/image" part we are perfect.

As for free will... If God had not allowed pure unadulterated evil and had somehow tried to tip the scales so that people could not know evil then, would we actually have "free" will? Would it be somehow lacking in freedom due to a lack of "complete" knowledge of good and evil? God has allowed evil so that when we choose over evil we are making a knowledgeable decision and our decision has true merit/worth and has not been made due to God "cheating" us out of truth.

God has to love us and have faith in us to trust our own decisions concerning the path we decide to take in our lives. If there was not full evil there would not be full obedience and pure virtue. God does not have to "play" with lives to be our overlord and master. He just sets a fair playing field and "we" make the moves.

0 Replies

Taliesin

We are the masters of our own destinies... Don't let anyone tell you differently. This I believe. It is when we relinquish the drivers seat to some other powers that be that we become a non being, lose our souls and our very existence. True destiny is a state of independence.

0 Replies

As I mentioned in another thread recently...

...the concept "free will"...

..is mostly used by Christians to try to explain why all the shyt in the world exists.

The "free will" argument is nonsense.

0 Replies

I'll agree with your last post, Rex, but not with the one before it.

Quote:

We are imperfect only if we identify ourselves with the physical part... but if one identifies themselves with the "spiritual/image" part we are perfect.

Actually, I think it is mostly in the mind that we are not perfect. I don't particularly care what someone looks like, but they're a complete jerk, that's going to make me not like them.

Quote:

God has allowed evil so that when we choose over evil we are making a knowledgeable decision and our decision has true merit/worth and has not been made due to God "cheating" us out of truth.

I suppose this argument has merit...but it brings up the question of why "God" made "evil" so hard to resist in the first place, since that actually makes it impossible for someone to ever be "fully obedient." By that argument, his making us live through evil instead of just knowing evil, denies us the opportunity to ever be "pure."

Let's keep this going, Rex, it's a fun debate. Very Happy

Frank: So...you don't believe in free will? I'll agree that the "free will" argument is used a lot as a way to cover the theists' asses, but I'm interested in seeing how you use it. All I've seen in the Free Will thread is you either disagreeing/agreeing with people, not stating your personal beliefs, though I might have missed them. What are they?

0 Replies

Taliesin181 wrote:

Frank: So...you don't believe in free will? I'll agree that the "free will" argument is used a lot as a way to cover the theists' asses, but I'm interested in seeing how you use it. All I've seen in the Free Will thread is you either disagreeing/agreeing with people, not stating your personal beliefs, though I might have missed them. What are they?

I do not have any "beliefs", Tal. I've mentioned that several times.

A "belief" is merely a guess in disguise.

When I make my guesses...and I have offered many guesses...I identify them as guesses.

As far as free will is concerned...I certainly think I have free will...and I strongly suspect you do also.

The point I was making in my last post had absolutely nothing to do with the existence or non-existence of "free will" -- or any of my guesses about it. The point was that when used by Christians it usually is used as a way of explaining away the absurdities of the theistic position.

Re-read my comment. You will see that is correct.

And you will see also, if you read my comments, that I offer many guesses...but no "beliefs."

Not really sure why you are having so much trouble with that!

0 Replies

Frank: I know your earlier posts had nothing to do with the existence of free will...that's why I asked whether or not you "believed" in it.
Since your post is basically a re-post...I'll put most of it aside...my question was more about why you believed in free will, and to what extent.

For the record: I think you're going a bit overboard on the "belief" issue. While I agree that people sometimes like to try to pass their personal views as "gospel truth," and should rightly be challenged on that, you've taken it a step too far. When I say "beliefs" I mean views, along with (I think) most other people. I've noticed a recent tendency from you to jump on anyone who doesn't explicitly say "I believe," i.e. the conversation between you and rex in the "Are we the Gods?" forum.

Quote:

and FrankApisa, I was stating what I think is right so perhaps I should have said "I believe", but I felt that I didn't need to.

I'm not jumping all over you here - just illuminating a trend towards semantics.

And remember my original question: Why do you believe in free will, and how much of it?

0 Replies

To All,

If we are to stay on topic, "free will" should perhaps be discussed with respect to the concept "self" rather than with respect to "belief".

If I go back multiple pages I think I raised the issue of whether the "self" was a "controlling" agent. This would be equivalent to the concept of "free will". However some philosophers have argued that such control is "illusary" and that multiple "selves" with different agenda vie with each other for "chairmanship of the committee".
This leads on to concepts of "Transcendent Self" and discussions of "control" as the cognitive imperative behind epistemological relations between "truth" "knowledge" and "belief".

Also, Franks familiar line about "guessing" only makes sense if we assume "reality" is independent of the observer, yet the same issues of "permanence of self" are mirrored by problems of "permanence of reality". So when Frank says "I think I have free will" he should perhaps bear in mind Gurdjieffs words:

"For most people, even for educated and thinking people, the chief obstacle in the way of acquiring self-consciousness consists in the fact that they think they possess it, that is . . .individuality in the sense of a permanent and unchangeable 'I', will, ability to do, and so on. It is evident that a man will not be interested if you tell him that he can acquire by long and difficult work something which, in his opinion, he already has".

EDITED

0 Replies

Taliesin181 wrote:

Frank: I know your earlier posts had nothing to do with the existence of free will...that's why I asked whether or not you "believed" in it.
Since your post is basically a re-post...I'll put most of it aside...my question was more about why you believed in free will, and to what extent.

For the record: I think you're going a bit overboard on the "belief" issue.

For the record...I don't.

Quote:

While I agree that people sometimes like to try to pass their personal views as "gospel truth," and should rightly be challenged on that, you've taken it a step too far.

I don't think so.

Quote:

When I say "beliefs" I mean views, along with (I think) most other people.

I could not possibly agree LESS with youl here.

First of all...please note that twice now I have mentioned that I am talking about Christians [/b]using the words "believe" and "belief."

It is my experience that a vast majority of Christians those words in ways completely different from the way you say you are using them.

And I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE WAY THEY USE THE WORDS.

Quote:

I've noticed a recent tendency from you to jump on anyone who doesn't explicitly say "I believe,"

I do NOT jump on them...I question what they are saying.

What is so difficult for you to understand about that?

In any case, I despise the words...and I am not anxious to have anyone ever use them. I wish they were dropped from the language...and everyone were forced to say exactly what they mean when they use the words.

If you are saying "that is my opinion" or "that is my estimate" or "that is my guess"...say it.

I do not know what people mean when they say "I believe..." because people simply use the words in totally different ways.

Quote:

... i.e. the conversation between you and rex in the "Are we the Gods?" forum.

Do you for one second think that when Rex says "I believe in God"...he means "I think there is a God?"

Ask him!

You will soon see that what you are supposing he is saying is NOT what he is saying.

Quote:

Quote:
and FrankApisa, I was stating what I think is right so perhaps I should have said "I believe", but I felt that I didn't need to.

I'm not jumping all over you here - just illuminating a trend towards semantics.

And remember my original question: Why do you believe in free will, and how much of it?

I DO NOT GODDAM BELIEVE IN ANYTHING GODDAMIT!

Stop asking me what I believe in, Tal! Wake the hell up!

I have already told you that I THINK I have free will. I THINK I DO.

I have already told you that I think you have free will. I THINK YOU DO.

I think Fresco has free will also...but he disagrees. However, I think he at least gets what I am saying when I write the words I write. You seem to regard them simply as words you can disregard.

Why?

In any case, I cannot even be sure I have free will...which is what I SUSPECT Fresco was trying to say.

Yes...my guess is that I do have free will...whatever the hell "free will" is. But it is by no means a certainty...on a number of levels.

0 Replies

Yeah, Frank. You believe that you are just guessing. I guess that you are believing but don't want to have to defend it, so you call it just guessing.
You say that a belief is just a guess in disguise. I'd say your guesses are beliefs in disguise.
Just kidding. Just had to pull your tail. Twisted Evil

0 Replies

Quote:

I DO NOT GODDAM BELIEVE IN ANYTHING GODDAMIT!

Stop asking me what I believe in, Tal! Wake the hell up!

I have already told you that I THINK I have free will. I THINK I DO.

I have already told you that I think you have free will. I THINK YOU DO.

I think Fresco has free will also...but he disagrees. However, I think he at least gets what I am saying when I write the words I write. You seem to regard them simply as words you can disregard.

Why?

In any case, I cannot even be sure I have free will...which is what I SUSPECT Fresco was trying to say.

Yes...my guess is that I do have free will...whatever the hell "free will" is. But it is by no means a certainty...on a number of levels.

Frank there is a contradiction somewhere in here. You are not sure if you have free will but you are free to guess?

Taliesin/Frank

And Frank is right... when I say "I believe" I am saying "I know" when he says he is "guessing" he is saying he doesn't know but he "thinks" it is such and such a way. I "know" because God has told me in the Bible (The Bible Tells Me So) and I "believe" the Bible.

Frank does not know because he is relying on a frame of reference that he has built up "himself" inside himself and he relates to. This frame of reference may have come from books or outside sources but they are guesses to Frank. My frame of reference is the Bible and I term them "God made" Franks frame of reference is inside of him and is "man made". Not unless Frank guesses that he is a God...

I trust the Bible (when properly interpreted). Frank, on the one hand, improperly interprets the Bible this is one reason to me as to why he rejects it. I on the other hand have seen that the Bible "interprets itself" and so I have seen a truth that Frank does not see.

Concerning free will and the self... The self/will is only "free" when it is unfettered by fear and ignorance. Franks likes to imply that I live in fear of my God but that is his frame of reference fueling that assumption. I do not claim that Frank lives in fear but I do fault him for thinking that I would have be in fear to love the God of the Bible.

These are the "guesses" that Frank is speaking of... and yes Frank they are wrong... You are entirely correct to label them guesses and I do not "believe" them myself.

0 Replies

2 Corinthians 5:11

Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.

Comment:
What I get from this verse is that we are not supposed to terrorize people into believing.. we are to persuade them. When we choose to persuade them then people know in their hearts the standards that we maintain and their conscience will tell them we are right and connected with the true God. The true God is seen in us when we persuade with love.

0 Replies

Frank,

I think that "ability to choose" (free will) is highly context dependent and includes such factors as physical and emotional well-being. Such factors in fact delimit our ability to "see choice" ie. define our
subjective realities. The Behavioursist definition of intelligence also comes to mind here: "Intelligence is the capacity to delay a response"...and perhaps this is all we mean by "free will".

A good example has just arisen with yesterday's news item about "the possible unlawful killing of a wounded fighter in Iraq". It is ludicrous to try to legislate for the context of "heat of battle". All discourse after the event (note this was only "an event" because the camera was there as selective observer) is merely an exercise in control of subsequent reality by imterested partiesi.e. delimiting collateral damage, or turning a "problem" into an "opportunity"...and as in the macrocosm so in the microcosm of the "self".

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

Frank,

I think that "ability to choose" (free will) is highly context dependent and includes such factors as physical and emotional well-being. Such factors in fact delimit our ability to "see choice" ie. define our
subjective realities. The Behavioursist definition of intelligence also comes to mind here: "Intelligence is the capacity to delay a response"...and perhaps this is all we mean by "free will".

A good example has just arisen with yesterday's news item about "the possible unlawful killing of a wounded fighter in Iraq". It is ludicrous to try to legislate for the context of "heat of battle". All discourse after the event (note this was only "an event" because the camera was there as selective observer) is merely an exercise in control of subsequent reality by imterested partiesi.e. delimiting collateral damage, or turning a "problem" into an "opportunity"...and as in the macrocosm so in the microcosm of the "self".

I quite agree with you thesis here, Fresco.

And if I may...there is also the possiblility that we truly function impulsively (meant literally) with very, very, very limited true free-will aspects. I almost hesitate to mention this...but I don't know if this possibility is so...nor do I know how to estimate its probability.

In any case, even significant "departures from the norm" in any human could simply be the result of programmed impulses in that direction.

The EST consciousness expansion program of Werner Earhart concluded with the notion of "We are machines!" Essentially he was saying that we enter the world blank and are subject to stimulation...to which we respond. Depending on how we respond to initial stimulation (whether we perceive it as something pleasant or noxious)...and how close we sense new stimulation to be to what we've already experienced and to which we have reacted...we respond to the new stimulation predicated on the previous.

Carried to its logical conclusion this notion almost denies "free will" as usually defined. (I notice in the other thread on free will running alongside this one...there have been attempts to define free will...with considerable differences of opinion on that issue.)

In any case, I PREFER to THINK (suppose, estimate, guess) that I have free will. If I am kidding myself on this, I doubt my error will cause me much harm.

0 Replies

Frank said:

Quote:

And I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE WAY THEY USE THE WORDS.

Okay, I'll attribute this to a misunderstanding. Yes, I had seen that you were referring to Christian uses of the word...but their status as theists does not automatically determine how they use the word. I cannot speak for Rex, but I've found quotes, like the one I had on my last post, that would indicate that he sees his views as personal beliefs that he thinks are true...but not universal truths we should all bow down and accept as truths for ourselves. if I'm wrong...shame on him.

You also wrote:

Quote:

I DO NOT GODDAM BELIEVE IN ANYTHING GODDAMIT!

Stop asking me what I believe in, Tal! Wake the hell up!

I have already told you that I THINK I have free will. I THINK I DO.

I have already told you that I think you have free will. I THINK YOU DO.

I think Fresco has free will also...but he disagrees. However, I think he at least gets what I am saying when I write the words I write. You seem to regard them simply as words you can disregard.

Why?

In any case, I cannot even be sure I have free will...which is what I SUSPECT Fresco was trying to say.

Yes...my guess is that I do have free will...whatever the hell "free will" is. But it is by no means a certainty...on a number of levels.

When I ask "What do you believe about ____?" I AM, AS I HAVE STATED BEFORE, ASKING, IN ESSENCE, "WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS/OPINIONS ON ___?"
By freaking out over word usage, you have provided a perfect example of what I am talking about! You know how I am using "belief", yet still decided to act like I was using it a different way!

I think we all need to take a step back and try and see things from a different perspective. Frank: I am not deliberately trying to goad you; when I use the word "belief," I use it as a synonym for "opinion" in matters where there is a meta-physical context, like "free will" or "gods." Thus, when I asked, I was trying to find out about the reasons for your "opinions" on free will, i.e. how you came to that conclusion, why you think it has more weight than the "we don't have free will" argument, etc., which, by the way, you still haven't answered, and I would very much like to hear.

If, in the future, it would make you more comfortable if I used to phrase "opinion" in place of "belief" when speaking to you, I'll do so...but find it unnecessary.

Now, Rex: I don't know what "interpretation" of the bible you're using, so I can't really comment on why you trust the bible, but to me the christian bible seems contradictory in its halves (Old vs. New Testament) how do you reconcile these two clearly different passages? I'd be really interested in your views. Thanks.

0 Replies

The Problem of Self

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know