[MD] The notion of Free Will

[MarshaV]

Hi Mary,  

On Jun 29, 2011, at 8:38 AM, Mary wrote:

>> 
>> Not either or, but neither nor, so MU.   
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
> 
> Right, but when you're talking about static free will a few questions come
> up.  
> 
> 
> [Marsha]
> As an explanation, I think Dan paraphrases RMP best when he states that to
> the extent that we follow static quality, there is no choice.  By following
> Dynamic Quality, we are free.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, RMP says that.  Is it true?


Marsha:
In my experience it is true.  


> Can you WILL yourself not to believe that?  

Marsha:
"you" "WILL" "yourself"  "that"???  Conventional/static stuff.  "To the extent that 
one follows static quality, there is no choice."   


> You might be persuaded or
> convinced by evidence, but you cannot simply WILL yourself to change your
> mind.
> 
> Just because you WANT to.
> 
> If you can't do that, do you have free will after all?


Marsha:
I neither accept free will, nor reject free will.  To accept free will is to 
follow (be attached to) static static.  To reject free will is to follow (be 
attached to) static quality.  Either way there is no choice.  


> If DQ is always GOOD.
> If DQ is the trajectory of evolution the static levels are moving along, 

Are you looking for an answer from a conventional point-of-view or an 
Ultimate point-of-view?  

1. Everything is _conventionally_ real.
2. Nothing is _ultimately_ real.
3. Everything is both _conventionally_ real and _ultimately_ unreal.
4. Nothing is either _conventionally_ unreal or _ultimately_ real.  
    

> Is there any such thing as free will?

From a conventional (static) either/or, s-o, illusionary point-of-view?  It is real.  
From an Ultimate neither/nor point-of-view?  It is not real.  


> Another way to put the question.  Why do you like what you like?

Static patterns.     


> If I like a painting because I feel that it speaks to me, why do I feel that
> it speaks to me?

Because we like to construct a good story???   I don't know...   


> I could reel off reasons.  But that doesn't answer the question.
> 
> Why do I value those reasons?

Static patterns.   


> Do I have a choice?

"To the extent that one follows static quality, there is no choice."   


> Just asking.

I like asking too, but the answer always turns out to be the same: not this, not that.   



Marsha 

 
___