All of this is very hazy and ill-defined. You’re talking about Physics and cosmology in one breath and human emotions (will) in another. They’re highly or even completely unrelated. How you expect a useful answer is beyond me.
Even as a philosophical question it is lacking direction. On top of that, you have other posts that have been answered that have discussed this already.
Today we know that for most of the existing elements, their sequel is in those dying stars and supernovae from almost 5 billion years ago.
Every molecule, every atom comes from the same phenomena.
And what about our will.
It may also be made up of molecules that created the same desires in us ?
And so even though we each have similar desires, each of us has a unique desire.
Is this just too, or does it have a reason and it lies in those phenomena.
And if so, what are the consequences ...
Watch the clip
And I would say that probably everything is in the eye of the beholder.
Yes, I'm talking about physics and emotions in the same breath.
Is that wrong?
I think we are used to examples that, although they make us orderly and systematic, they keep us out of the box.
I don't think the next paradigm will come from the same concept you consider, but rather from the understanding that there is only desire. And the rest - sequels and results.
And if so. It is precisely in changing our will that we can make material changes.
You may not find any logic in my perception, I can understand that.
"So there is not only desire, and if you reduce everything to desire, what explanation can you give for conscious choices that sacrifice desire for a higher purpose"?
Listen, a poor person earns NIS 2,500 a month.
Next week he has a wedding.
He buys suit for NIS 2000.
What actually happened?
His desire to receive respect from the guests was greater than the desire to save money.
And all in all, our lives add up.
for what i give more importance.
It depends on my environment and my internal data.
And if we look at the reality in upgraded glass, that is what we see, desires and history of those desires.
I don't seem to be able to convey the message clearly.
I'll try to illustrate according to a scholar named Kant.
Kant strongly objected that experiences transmitted through an inner sense can serve as the basis for mental science (as experiences mediated by external senses serve as the basis for the natural sciences).
He argued that this was not measurable and was not mathematical analysis.
And so according to Kant psychology can never be a real science.
This blow was devastating for anyone interested in human science. And the practical result of his criticism was the pushing out of psychology from universities for at least a hundred years.
But the evolution of human science has its own clear axis.
In 1879, Wilhelm Wendt founded the first psychological research laboratory in Germany. For the first time, psychology was accepted as an independent scientific field in the academy.
What does this show us?
That new paradigms are rooted as part of the commitment axis of consciousness.
And what is today? How can a topic that seems philosophical to us without the ability of empirical measurement become empirical.
Answer: In changing our tools, those internal tools that are our will. It is our inner essence that is the root of our thoughts and actions that will become a new research laboratory.