Free Will and Individuality

As far as I know does a Common Will exist within individuals or do individuals define our notion of self as it is. As human's we are able to be conscious of the choices we make but what drives us to make these choices. Is the will the immaterial presence of self the unification of the conscious effort with the object being chosen. Is free will the ultimate knowledge of individuality and how we define individuality is indeed something that is a conscious observation of a common will. Is individuality just a term we put around the indefinite understanding of the human person. Is the will the expression of self through the individual by ultimately destroying all conscious effort by the individual and a reemergence of a new kind of consciousness. A consciousness that is in and of itself part of a higher consciousness. Does the individual express itself as itself when it is able to will something because ultimately the will is an unconscious effort by our mind subjected to the basic principles of mankind. Ultimately individuality is the expression of self that cannot be described by human conscious but is instead a principle that is an expression of consciousness itself and why it works. It is understandable then that in order to know why Humans think the way they do it is necessary to go beyond the definition of their thoughts about the ideals which surround individuality. Free Will is the projection of self upon the individual. It is an expression which is the driving force behind the conscious choices made in life.

[edit on 1-5-2010 by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010]

Can you try to explain to me what NOT free will is? What would not having free will be? Does a rock not have free will? What is will?

Free will is not:

The only way to get into a "heaven" is through the salvation of "jesus".

I think free will can be described as,

+/-/= (+)+(-)=(=) or something like that, mybe you understand.


I enjoy your post, as difficult as they me be to decipher lol.

[edit on 1-5-2010 by onequestion]

Originally posted by onequestion
Can you try to explain to me what NOT free will is? What would not having free will be? Does a rock not have free will? What is will?

Free will is not:

The only way to get into a "heaven" is through the salvation of "jesus".

I think free will can be described as,

+/-/= (+)+(-)=(=) or something like that, mybe you understand.


I enjoy your post, as difficult as they me be to decipher lol.

[edit on 1-5-2010 by onequestion]

Yeah sorry for the convuluted post it sort of is a description of the self convoluted ways my conscious is able to reflect on myself. Free Will is a matter of being human it essentially does not take us to consciously choose as individuals whether we are able to define what it means to be free but that as a matter of fact is an essential part of human life. To be free is an aspect and element presented to us in every experience we perceive. It is Free Will which makes our experience conscious of itself and thus more than just purely human as a physical manifestation but as a metaphysical signifigance which surrounds only the human being. Free Will is a free floating term with no application to any distinct law of human distinction instead it is the basis of every law which dictates the conscious behavior of the human to a specific thing. That is to say as humans we are able to choose as personal and individual beings the good we see in the object as it relates to us. It is the subjective presence of free will which allows us to choose for ourselves as rational beings whether we want what is good or evil. The human distinction cannot be discriminated against by the Will but essentially the nature of the human effort must be judged to be what it is either a good result or bad result of human freedom. Human freedom by the way has more restrictions to itself than the distinction made by free will. And that is to say we are limited in our consciousness of a particular object and how the self relates to the knowledge of this thing. The Will goes beyond the distinction of good and evil and defines ourselves as one with the concept of the object an rational exponent of it that cannot be explained by us but only as an I. A thing not present in say the rock as a force upon which we carry out our acts but a necessity which presents to us the basic nature and principle which drives us to act upon a thing or make it a part of ourselves. It is not bound to our definition to define the human relationship with the thing because it is metaphysically a concept to unite these two principles which the will does. That is why as humans we can only define ourselves as through our own individuality and likewise everything in space and time. The connection we know between object and subject is based purely around the human knowledge which is the intuition of all our acts. Though in nature the thing subjectivity is based upon the creative potential of Human's and thus the object upon which a choice is made is based upon the individual conception of self which essentially does not pertain to good or evil as we define it. Instead the will defines each thing as pertaining to the subjectivity of the choice made which is a conscious effort made by humans. As a thing that does not necessarily exist within our minds without a conception of ourselves as an I an inexpressible force which defines itself as the unification of the object acted upon and the actor. Thus it is essential to say free will is not a thing of the human distinction merely a self reflection or a limited form expressed through the freedom to choose between a positive or negative. The Free Will though in nature does not refine itself to these human concepts but remains essentially a negative force which negates all that we know of ourselves through our consciousness and translates it to the being upon which the concepts of object and subject have allowed us to make a conscious choice to choose a thing in our own time. The Free Will thus is not a choice but does not refrain our choice to any particular human distinction it is not a distinction that can be made whether a rock has free will. As a thing of nature to be acted upon the rocks qualities as a concept of self are good because the rock exist within itself in a constant state. The rock nature as a subject though is only in itself unlike human's who can consciously make subjective statement about reality. The rock only maintains itself as a part of reality. While humans are able to make conscious logical distinctions based upon this nature of self. Ultimately free will is not equal in every thing that is held in the I of its concept but it essentially exist as a concept in each thing unifying the rock with the creative power of conscious subjectivity. The rock though cannot maintain free will because it exist without a proper functioning of itself without knowledge that it exist. It is the knowledge of our existence which encapsulates the knowledge of self which allows us to make conscious decisions based upon the nature of the rock as a part of the human act. Yet not influencing the act because of its existence but rather being influenced by the existence of a conscious self which co-exist with the rock.

So, are you saying that free will is our ability to choose our perspective? But not so much the choice we make, as the perspective to see what the choice was we made? Does that make sense to you?

Originally posted by onequestion
So, are you saying that free will is our ability to choose our perspective? But not so much the choice we make, as the perspective to see what the choice was we made? Does that make sense to you?

Yes makes perfect sense yes free will is essentially a part of the choice we make but that it is only part of the equation in order for our self conscious to engage in such a choice we must first be conscious of what we have chosen thus the seperation between the subject and object. Cause and effect.

reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010


Ah cool. I feel uneducated reading what you write sometimes. But at least i can figure it out.

Originally posted by onequestion
reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010

 

Ah cool. I feel uneducated reading what you write sometimes. But at least i can figure it out.

Well sorry I don't mean it that way I just see things that way. I know it is one thing for me to be conscious about what I write maybe I need to translate into a more distinct from rather than trying to get to detailed by metaphysical forms. Have you studied Philosophy btw. How old are you?

reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010


I am 24. I just read, and read, and read. Everything. Most of my philosophy i have developed on my own through other philosophy. I started to learn about Einstein at a very young age. I was raised in this environment so to speak. Sometimes i don't know where my info comes from.

I have been coming into my own style of writing as well. The more i try to define my own personal philosophy and term it into words, and writing, the better my ability to convey my thoughts becomes, or the observation of those thoughts. Although some of our experience will remain ours, as some things have to be seen, or experienced in order to understand.

Side note:

I have done enough research to earn a degree in something. I spend like 5-6 hours a day reading/learning/understanding.

[edit on 1-5-2010 by onequestion]

Originally posted by onequestion
reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010

 

I am 24. I just read, and read, and read. Everything. Most of my philosophy i have developed on my own through other philosophy. I started to learn about Einstein at a very young age. I was raised in this environment so to speak. Sometimes i don't know where my info comes from.

I have been coming into my own style of writing as well. The more i try to define my own personal philosophy and term it into words, and writing, the better my ability to convey my thoughts becomes, or the observation of those thoughts. Although some of our experience will remain ours, as some things have to be seen, or experienced in order to understand.

Side note:

I have done enough research to earn a degree in something. I spend like 5-6 hours a day reading/learning/understanding.

[edit on 1-5-2010 by onequestion]

Yeah I definitely know you are probably more intelligent then me lol I am only a freshman in college you are definitely more refined then me and you are able to temper or control or your methodology of thought into a thing most human's can rationally understand. I have been reading into philosophy for a long time since I was like 14 or 15. These concepts arose in my mind simple at first things like cause and effect and they grew. My main thing though about Philosophy that has influenced me and drawn me towards is the fact it ultimately drives toward the knowledge of self and the diversity of being contained in this knowledge. That from knowledge of self one's full potential can be exercised and a harmony with self and universe can be attained. I was always most interested in the German Idealist. People like Hegel, schiller, kant, and even existentialist like Kierkegaard and Nietszche have deeply influenced me. Also Heidegger is another interesting character I like to study.

reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010


I am not more intelligent than anyone. I do however carry a very unique perspective. I have been mostly influenced by my father. He underwent a large portion of his spiritual undertakings when i was young and he tried out his theories and talked about his beliefs the most with us. I was able to see what he was going through at a very young age and translate it into my own being. I wouldn't say change your style of writing because you may catch a few minds eyes someone else wouldn't have caught with their terms.

I like to think this,

The less I know, the more room for growth. So i just approach everything like it is new, and like i have never heard or experienced it before so that i can take in whatever positive it may actually be, or bring.

I learned that boxing in the gym! lol

Yeah I believe there is a truth but that it is open minded to all styles and that we can find positivity in every one's mind regardless of difference. It is difference which makes us a manifestation of the positive freedom of our souls.

Free will is a loop I catch myself in a lot when I start to think about ..as far as the topic is concerned free will would enforce individuality as my choice may be different than yours, and even we both choose the same path ...free will would dictate that the outcomes may not necessarily be the same thus maintaining individuality.


However I have issues with the free will and religion thing, something I never understood, so maybe someone can clear it up for me, because even growing up catholic ( catholic school, altar boy etc and no ..my priest never touched me ..no matter what I did

All of time is like one big reel of film. Essentially it's already there, laid out, multiple frames etc.

Our bodies physical ability to perceive, limits us to experiencing time on a frame by frame basis.

That being said, our actions in fact may be pre-determined, seeing as we know that our conscious mind thinks of our actions after the signals are fired in the brain to begin the act.

However. Now were faced with the possibility that maybe all life isn't just one reel of film, but every film that ever could be, and our experiences fall in line with the film which is being determined by every single act, by every single thing at all times.

I like the idea however, that it isn't our choice to act, but our choice to determine the worth found within each action and grow from it as an experience, as that may be all we can do.

-- All of that is speculative of course, as is philosophy.