[MD] Free will

[MarshaV]

Jan-Anders,  

All that you write may be conventionally true, but not necessary.  Causal field, effect and the relationship between them are interdependent static patterns with their existence  further dependent on the conceptual act of slicing and dicing experience into independent entities: useful illusions.  That would make "competition between different agents of free will" also a useful illusion.  One can function in a perfectly good manner without the narration & questions and without the notion of freewill & choice, by responding mindfully and naturally to the flow of events.  

"And what is good, Phædrus,
 And what is not good...
 Need we ask anyone to tell us these things?"  

No, we need not ask anyone, including ourselves.   


Marsha 






On Jun 21, 2011, at 7:54 AM, Jan-Anders Andersson wrote:

> Marsha
> 
> Well if we consider that all ongoing events or processes of all the 4 levels are using free will to exist and trying to make the best out of the situation under the actual conditions then it is obvious that there are many wills going on at the same time that are striving to provide themselve a better quality. Competition between different agents of free will is limitating each ones possibilities and desire. I guess we could easily agree about that. Therefore it is not only about the free will but also about who's free will we are talking.
> 
> I had a nice talk yesterday night with my old friend and she is worried about her limited right to decide whether to live or not. Old persons are kept alive as long as possible without asking about their own opinion about the quality of their life. When someone are old and disabled in a number of ways unable to make choices on their own to keep a decent standard of living, many of these people would like to have the right to end their life, choose to not live any longer. The 'not' choice is also a choice, an expression of free will. The personal free will versus the societal free will.
> 
> We may be talking about the same thing but in different words, I prefer to discuss experiences of things that are happening, real or what we can call it. Things that are not, doesn't show on screen, are in my opinion nothing else than boring, not fun and without commercial potential.
> 
> Instead of contemplating over the meaninglessness of 't', 'i' or 'g' I find more interest in trying and comparing the pragmatic value of all the different combinations of these and other letters. How such a combination can make up a word and in its prolonging a set of words can build a complete sentence and so on.
> 
> I am using my free will just writing this now sitting in a cheap pizza shop with the annoying sound from TV-commercials and a giant lawn mover running outside in the park over the street. No guarantee about the direction of the quality, it may be better or worse, but you can rest assure that I try my best.
> 
> The pizza was great, salami, onion, cheese and green jalapenos. 4 times bigger than my ipad!
> 
> ---- "All clean! With the power of steam" bla bla bla.
> 
> I see that I've got about one hour left before my next meeting. What can I do within that hour?
> What can I do that provides a better quality of life?
> Leaving the shop and moving into the park outside was a good Idea. The big lawn mover is gone and some birds are singing in the trees. I am sitting on a bench with my ipad in my lap, choosing what words to write to make a meaningful message. In front of me there are red pions and some other pale and dark violet flowers. A young alm tree has grown in the flowers and stretches its tiny light green twigs towards the sky. Yellow buses, small and bigger cars are passing behind my back in a continous stream. No smell of hot greasy pizza, no TV-commercial. This is better. A man dressed in white and with an insect protection hat is walking around on the roof of a theater. That was interesting. I can see that he is checking bee hives placed on the roof, in the middle of a big city. Strange.
> 
> There must be a certain space of available future to perform the acts of free will and to know if it was a good choice the consequences must be experienced and evaluated after the event. Without time and causality free will is impossible to perform and experience.
> 
> Have it
> 
> Jan-Anders
> 
> 
> 20 jun 2011 kl. 16:05 marsha wrote:
> 
>> J-A,
>> 
>> My post was not meant to be a "smart" quick-fire reply.  I consider what you've written here to represent your point-of-view, and I respect that.  My point-of-view is that free will is an intellectual static pattern of value that can be dropped, along with an autonomous causation.  Dropping them has no affect on my ability to accept personal responsibility within a conventional (static) reality.  I am not sure why you think the future requires freewill.    Personally, I find a more mindful/intuitional response to experience provides a better quality of life.  
>> 
>> Marsha 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 20, 2011, at 6:56 AM, MarshaV wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> J-A,
>>> 
>>> Okay, this is your understanding of "the way things are."  Mine is: 
>>> not this, not that.        
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Marsha  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jun 20, 2011, at 5:27 AM, Jan-Anders Andersson wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Sorry Marsha and Steve but you are definitely on the wrong way here.
>>>> 
>>>> Free will is not an illusion. Free will is the ultimate basic condition for unpredictability and ever changing identities.
>>>> 
>>>> It may be scary to grasp the personal responsibility it takes but without free will there would be no future at all.
>>>> 
>>>> Enjoy life
>>>> 
>>>> Jan-Anders
>>>> 
>>>> 20 jun 2011 kl. 10.36 skrev moq_discuss-request at lists.moqtalk.org:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Jun 19, 2011, at 6:57 PM, Steven Peterson wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Horse <horse at darkstar.uk.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> So we're kind of back to the idea that 'Free Will' is an illusion!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sam Harris goes further to say that those who meditate learn that
>>>>>> illusion of free will is itself an illusion:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "It is generally argued that our sense of free will presents a
>>>>>> compelling mystery: on the one hand, it is impossible to make sense of
>>>>>> in causal terms; on the other, we feel that we are the authors of our
>>>>>> own actions. However, I think that this mystery is itself a symptom of
>>>>>> our confusion. It is not that free will is simply an illusion: our
>>>>>> experience is not merely delivering a distorted view of reality;
>>>>>> rather, we are mistaken about the character of our experience. We do
>>>>>> not feel as free as we think we do. Our sense of our own freedom
>>>>>> results from our not paying close attention to what it is like to be
>>>>>> ourselves in the world. The moment we do pay attention, we begin to
>>>>>> see that free will is nowhere to be found, and our subjectivity is
>>>>>> perfectly compatible with this truth. Thoughts and intentions simply
>>>>>> arise in the mind. What else could they do? The truth about us is
>>>>>> stranger than many suppose: the illusion of free will is itself an
>>>>>> illusion."
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Steve,
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is right on, and why it is so hard to find a good way to say it.  The 
>>>>> illusion of free will and causation are themselves illusions.  The illusion 
>>>>> is an illusion, like emptiness is empty, like the fundamental nature of 
>>>>> of the determinate is the indeterminate.  Can it become any more 
>>>>> beautiful. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Great quote!     
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Marsha 
>> 
> 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


 
___