free will
Setanta, I think the limiting factor posited in refutations of the free will thesis is CAUSATION. These "determinists" anchor everything in causal preconditions: everything is caused by antecedent conditions (all the way "back," I suppose) to a Prime Mover. It is a model of the universe that looks always backwards to determinants; the free will model which is no more "proveable" (Frank
) always looks forward--to a future of multiple possibilities or options.
By the way, regarding the psychological depth of Nietzsche's Zarathustra, Carl Jung conducted a five or six year seminar on the book.
I've no doubt that ol' Carl could find symbolism aplenty to dissect to a mere grain in that work. None of which alters the fact that it is a floridly overwritten work, the value of which lies in examining just how wrong Freddy got everything, rather than in the putative wisdom he propounds . . .
truth
Setanta, one more thing. I talked to a scholar of Nietzsche who insists that one cannot possibly understand the TSZ in one's youth. One must have read all of Nietzsche and many of his interpreters (including Schacht, Heidegger, Jaspers and Kaufmann) and perhaps only in one's later years will it become acessible. It IS a difficult work, he says, which leads many to ridicule it as a mere effort at obscurantism. It's as if I, a mathematical illiterate, were to ridicule the work of Einstein as mere number crunching.
Well, i do wish to thank you for your assumption of my particular brand of illiteracy, whatever you take that to be . . . from a literary point of view, and Freddy's personal papers show he believed it would be a literary success, it is a mess . . . it's badly written, and it's all over the road . . . course, how can i be writing that, lil' ol' illiteate me . . .
Re: truth
JLNobody wrote:Setanta, one more thing. I talked to a scholar of Nietzsche who insists that one cannot possibly understand the TSZ in one's youth. One must have read all of Nietzsche and many of his interpreters (including Schacht, Heidegger, Jaspers and Kaufmann) and perhaps only in one's later years will it become acessible. It IS a difficult work, he says, which leads many to ridicule it as a mere effort at obscurantism. It's as if I, a mathematical illiterate, were to ridicule the work of Einstein as mere number crunching.
Well, i disagree with being able to understand Zaratustra in one's youth, I'm only 15 & I started reading that book the 2nd of June of 2002, it took me 8 monthsto finish ot, & I read it over & over until I found sense to his words, it helped me in a weird part of my short life. It's just a matter of how much effort you put on it & how much perpicacity you have, & of course, it also matters how smart you are.
That's an interesting point Dux, and I think you have found a very good place to discuss what you have understood. It is possible that your understanding will change in time.
I do not discount your opinnion because of your youth, I encourage it! Maybe with a strong world-view, you can shape your life more surely than the amorphous blob my own history has become.
Dux; a good bit of advice from seal...;
and I will add:
keep the specific wisdom that is youth, your energy, and curiosity always close to you; but pay close attention also to the wisdom of others.
What people such as Setanta, and jlN have to say always confers the opportunity to widen any knowledge you have aquired, and gives it new facets, with which to look further............
And I would like to piggy-back on BoGoWo's above post; there are many people on A2K with great knowledge in many fields. Keep and open mind, and learn from them. I'm 67, and have learned much from the people participating on the many forums on A2K. c.i.
truth
Dux, I congratulate you on your precosity. Nevertheless, Nietzscne once wrote that only people who have experience great joy and great sorrow are likely to understand his Zarathrustra. I hope you have not experienced great sorrow at your tender age.
Well, sorrow & joy are relative. For example the greatest sorrow I've experimented was when I felt that my superficial world lacked of importance. I was the typical smart-ass/cool kid, but through a series of circunstances I realized some things, & that lead me to ask questions & that elad to philosophy, it was hard to leave a past life behind to experience a new life. & the greatest joy I had was when i formulated my first couple of theories bout life.
I think we can all agree that Dux, at 15, is a talent. At 15, I wasn't occupied but with girls.
truth
Dux and with your youth, you'll probably go far.
Our will is certainly not entirely free, since it is constrained by self- and culturally-imposed rules as well as biological imperatives (try holding your breath for 3 minutes). I do think that we have some control over our choices, but that sense of control may be illusory since every decision is a product of our past experiences and biological makeup, which we had little or no control over.
As to the eternal return theory, we now know that the universe is not infinite in time (Nietzsche predated the big bang theory), and may not be infinite in space. Since earth, mankind, and the universe are evolving, the exact conditions necessary for you to repeat this life will never recur. Even if the multiverse is infinite in time and space, there are different degrees of infinity (Cantor's alephs) and neither a planet exactly like earth nor life with exactly the same genetic makeup is ever likely to recur.
If our sense of self is created by our brain, the new self would have to have exactly the same genetic makeup and experiences as the previous one. Nietzsche did not know about DNA and that it is virtually impossible for an individual's DNA sequence to recur since your children will have a mix of DNA from yourself and your spouse. Your children and grandchildren will encounter different teachers, friends, TV shows, technology, etc. than you did. Perhaps in Nietzsche's time life seemed recurrent, but had he lived today he would not have thought so.
Philosophically speaking, given almost infinite number of possible lives to live, why should we repeat the same one over and over? Even if we are reincarnated, hopefully next time around we won't make the same mistakes and will spend more time enjoying life (and learning from NEW mistakes).
Re: truth
JLNobody wrote:Dux and with your youth, you'll probably go far.
sure you'll go far; but, you won't be able to take your youth with you....
for long!
Thanks for that comment, Bo.
I metnioned that to Terry several times. It is the one area where Terry and I disagree to a significant degree.
Frank; (nudge, nudge) over here where no one else is listening;
you know cosmology would be a great place for you to specialize, since unlike ontology, and the like, nobody is realy too sure of anything.....
oops
sorry frank;
here, let me help you get that nasty long sharp knife out of your back
Bo
When yer right, yer right.
