|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 10:17 am
LibidinalCatharsis Okay, I may be repeating someone else's ideas here, but I didn't feel like reading all three bloody pages. First, we consider the theory that our personality is determined by two things, both of which are beyond our control: genetics, and our "environment," i.e. the people we meet, the places we live, the things that happen to us. Second, we consider that we all act according to our personalities. For instance, I know that I'm not going to suddenly jump up and start reciting conservative beliefs and forcing them on everyone here, because that's not who I am. Because, as we see in paragraph two, I wasn't brought up that way. I was always taught to be tolerant of others' beliefs. That's why I joined this guild. Third, we consider that the things that happen to us are the consequences of our actions individually as well as as a people. Add this to the standard, "All men are created equal" (courtesy of John Locke and Thomas Hobbes), and you understand that the creator made us the way we are. So if the creator made us the way we are, and we are just the result of our programming, then we certainly were meant to believe we have free will, but in fact, I don't believe we do. But since we were meant to believe we do, it only makes sense to go on as if we didn't question it, because if we don't, we'll be stuck at the snack counter, not knowing whether or not we should get the snickers bar because we're too busy wondering if we're the ones choosing it or not. Some things weren't meant to be pondered because they can interfere with living life. It's best to go on as if we have free will, regardless of whether or not we do. You forgot to factor in that things are either caused or uncaused. Things that are caused have certain results which will cause other things, things which are uncaused will not cause things that would have been caused if the uncaused were caused. Secondly if we use Descartes, we can say that by just thinking or even doubting our existence of freewill causes freewill to be true; the same goes for destiny.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 10:20 am
Marjuari_the_elemental I think it has already been said...but just to republish the thought: Free-Will can break Destiny, just as Destiny can break Free-Will For me, enough said Your statement becomes false when we look at the freewill/destiny issue like this: 100% freewill means there is no destiny, thus destiny cannot break freewill. 100% destiny means there is no freewill, thus freewill cannot break destiny.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 11:12 am
I believe in something of a hybrid system as well. Many decisions we may feel we make on our own are only pseudo-choices within our conscious used to justify our inexplicable subconsciously-based action. Consider, however, the possibility that the conscious is something of an 'override switch' of the body. One example of such is the not-so-commonly practiced scourging. No other living being on this planet, to my knowledge, will choose to harm itself for the sake of improving its decision-making skill. While other species may harm others to correct their offspring or to protect from offenders, none will directly harm itself, because this goes against the primary natural instinct of survival. Humans, however, seem to have a keen affinity for breaking these instincts when appealing to what I shall have to call the "conscious."
As for how the conscious is able to operate, the theories I have are quite varied, but the most obvious answer seems to be to point at the classical view of the spirit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 4:06 pm
chaoticpuppet You forgot to factor in that things are either caused or uncaused. Things that are caused have certain results which will cause other things, things which are uncaused will not cause things that would have been caused if the uncaused were caused. Secondly if we use Descartes, we can say that by just thinking or even doubting our existence of freewill causes freewill to be true; the same goes for destiny. But nothing can be uncaused. Every thing is caused by something, and everything has an effect. And your second point is not necessarily true, because doubting the existence of free will does not cause free will to be true. It could just be that we were created in a way that we would doubt it. These ideas are all very complicated. I wish I were better with words, it would make everything so much easier to understand. xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 5:54 pm
LibidinalCatharsis chaoticpuppet You forgot to factor in that things are either caused or uncaused. Things that are caused have certain results which will cause other things, things which are uncaused will not cause things that would have been caused if the uncaused were caused. Secondly if we use Descartes, we can say that by just thinking or even doubting our existence of freewill causes freewill to be true; the same goes for destiny. But nothing can be uncaused. Every thing is caused by something, and everything has an effect. And your second point is not necessarily true, because doubting the existence of free will does not cause free will to be true. It could just be that we were created in a way that we would doubt it. These ideas are all very complicated. I wish I were better with words, it would make everything so much easier to understand. xp Something that is not done is uncaused, in other words, you are in a situation, in which two things can be done, you can do act 1 or act 2. If you do act 1, than act 2 is uncaused, if you do act 2 act 1 is uncaused. According to your upbringing and your personality, you will make the choice to do one over the other, the one you do is caused, the one you don't do is uncaused. According to Descartes A Companion to Epistemology The act of casting doubt on the proposition that one is thinking confirms its truth, and this in turn unavoidably implies that there must be an existing subject. Source: A Companion to Epistemology edited by Jonathan Dancy and Ernest Sosa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 6:15 am
chaoticpuppet Something that is not done is uncaused, in other words, you are in a situation, in which two things can be done, you can do act 1 or act 2. If you do act 1, than act 2 is uncaused, if you do act 2 act 1 is uncaused. According to your upbringing and your personality, you will make the choice to do one over the other, the one you do is caused, the one you don't do is uncaused. Then we could go into a theory for parallel dimensions, but I think we're in enough of a brain tangle as we stand without trying to sort that out smile Maybe for another thread
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 3:44 pm
QuizMiz chaoticpuppet Something that is not done is uncaused, in other words, you are in a situation, in which two things can be done, you can do act 1 or act 2. If you do act 1, than act 2 is uncaused, if you do act 2 act 1 is uncaused. According to your upbringing and your personality, you will make the choice to do one over the other, the one you do is caused, the one you don't do is uncaused. Then we could go into a theory for parallel dimensions, but I think we're in enough of a brain tangle as we stand without trying to sort that out smile Maybe for another thread Maybe... but now, in this parallel dimension, would you still be you? And would the choices there still be yours?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:44 pm
hmm.. wow.. tough but good question/topic here.. did something like this in school when we were reading Romeo and Juilet.. it was something like 'do you always have a choice' or whatever.. and then there was the discussion of 'destiny vs freewill' like here.. all through that section i was at a loss.. i didnt speak up at all (except once, but my reponse was shunned because apparently it was stupid) because i didnt really know my position.. as is the same here and now... i think ill ponder it and get back to you if im ever able to sort my thoughts ><
one think im pretty sure of though, is that i dont think that destiny can be broken by freewill.. if you believe in destiny then your freewill cannot break it for the act of your freewill is already predestined and thus follows your road of fate.. unless i am not taking into account for something that is..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:56 pm
Krazy Lew hmm.. wow.. tough but good question/topic here.. did something like this in school when we were reading Romeo and Juilet.. it was something like 'do you always have a choice' or whatever.. and then there was the discussion of 'destiny vs freewill' like here.. all through that section i was at a loss.. i didnt speak up at all (except once, but my reponse was shunned because apparently it was stupid) because i didnt really know my position.. as is the same here and now... i think ill ponder it and get back to you if im ever able to sort my thoughts >< Don't worry about not knowing where you stand. I, myself, am pretty clueless as to where I stand on this issue. Sometimes I see everything as all destiny, othertimes as all freewill, and the rest of the time I see it as some mix of both. Also, don't worry about sounding stupid, almost any opinion is a viable option. So, in other words, if you have an idea feel free to post it. It can't be any worse than whats already been posted, can it?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 12:03 am
chaoticpuppet Marjuari_the_elemental I think it has already been said...but just to republish the thought: Free-Will can break Destiny, just as Destiny can break Free-Will For me, enough said Your statement becomes false when we look at the freewill/destiny issue like this: 100% freewill means there is no destiny, thus destiny cannot break freewill. 100% destiny means there is no freewill, thus freewill cannot break destiny. o hey.. thats what i just said.. XD..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2005 2:41 am
ok.. i think i now know what i want to say.. (took awhile.. i know. im sorry.. sweatdrop )
about fate.. i dont think i believe in it... to believe that there is a written or unwritten law that something will happen at sometime.... no.. i think that we just all live our lives and thats it. most of the time (yes, im still not quite sure of myself) i believe that we all are just pawns in this little world where we are to grow and adapt and learn and experience and thats it.... fate.. destiny.. its nothing.. just another concept that has come forth or created and made itself known in our evolving (or de-evolving for some people) minds..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:11 am
the way i see it, theres fate, but more than one way it could turn based on decisions set by fate for you to make.
so its really both, if you look at it that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2005 2:20 pm
LibidinalCatharsis chaoticpuppet You forgot to factor in that things are either caused or uncaused. Things that are caused have certain results which will cause other things, things which are uncaused will not cause things that would have been caused if the uncaused were caused. Secondly if we use Descartes, we can say that by just thinking or even doubting our existence of freewill causes freewill to be true; the same goes for destiny. But nothing can be uncaused. Every thing is caused by something, and everything has an effect. And your second point is not necessarily true, because doubting the existence of free will does not cause free will to be true. It could just be that we were created in a way that we would doubt it. These ideas are all very complicated. I wish I were better with words, it would make everything so much easier to understand. xp that would be what the buddhists call "conditioned arising", i believe. but they say it can be overcome through detachment. science is not all predestinarian either; it has "chaos theory", where a butterfly flapping its wings in china can make george Bush sneeze. it is causation but not fatalistic because it cannot be predicted or determined.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:03 pm
I always believed in freewill....until i started seeing "things" in my dreams...........
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2005 2:34 pm
I believein Freewill, becasue without freewill, we wouldn't have Karma, and I strongly believe in Karma. I believe that the Universe responds to everything we do, whether we're aware of it or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
