Do we really have free will?

reply to post by smithjustinb


Incase you didn't get my exploding sun allegory let me clear up what I'am saying. Fate coincidentally allowed you to have a chance at saving your species all to destroy the old world. It's like chess pieces that never stop moving. Remember when you said it's like a dance. You have free will but your free will coincides with everything else that is going on. So ultimately your free will is an illusion.

OP i think answered own question, we have only human free will

cause devaputra and not even deva (archangel) have total free will -

only God/Bramha has absolute free will, being omnipotent and all still yet allow evil to exist in the world because kali (fallen angel/deity) willed it- within limitations - thank God!

reply to post by smithjustinb


Imagine a graph representing suffering and the belief in god. Suffering and a belief in god are almost directly connected untill you suffer to much and then you see that its not a game and no super intelligence is ordering the murder of children.

reply to post by Wertdagf


Unless ofcourse their is a major reasoning behind the suffering and the order. If it is an individual doing all this suffering. And the ordering of the murder of these children is directed toward say a government. you are meant to suffer so that when you pull yourself up out of the dirt you have the strength to be the hero needed to save those children. Occams razor would suggest that, that order was to test the righteousness of man. Sometime to prove worthyness is to disobey. That's my understanding of your allegory. Just wanted to give another view on your reasoning.

reply to post by Manunnaki


not matter what we do... we will never be able to save enough lives to make up for all the horrible things our ancestors suffered. Pointing at this day and age as some sort of cure all is pitifully foolish.

God letting trillions of babies get raped so that you can jump in and save one a million years later sounds like a horrible strategy.

Freewill is like power the more powerful you are the more free your will is...
don't be caught in the politician stuff that's not power that's a muppets show..
i speak about knowing and cancelling all the automatic behaviours you can catch... merging the conscious and the unconscious... remaining sane in the process of course!
after that you will understand that instances to express your freewill are really infinite even in a second!
In the end you will find the number of choices are the same for everyone (infinite or quite a lot) but the more you are conditioned by your sorroundings (physical, mental, astral, spiritual, karmical etc..) the less choices you will see and the more you will be

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by Manunnaki

 

not matter what we do... we will never be able to save enough lives to make up for all the horrible things our ancestors suffered. Pointing at this day and age as some sort of cure all is pitifully foolish.

God letting trillions of babies get raped so that you can jump in and save one a million years later sounds like a horrible strategy.

your clear wording are the proof that there is no christ
there is just disgusting monsters ready n able to repeat their crimes infront of everyone each second of a day more eternally since that is what they are while knowing what to realize in order to get to their wills
and ordinary individuals focusing on survival issues since they must mean being individuals objectively too

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by Manunnaki

 

not matter what we do... we will never be able to save enough lives to make up for all the horrible things our ancestors suffered. Pointing at this day and age as some sort of cure all is pitifully foolish.

we are supposed to be proof that our ancestors didnt suffer for nothing.

Originally posted by ImaFungi
we are supposed to be proof that our ancestors didnt suffer for nothing.

for what?? for monsters powerful life inventing the illusion to make in each one mind how he is suffering less then his ancestor and by following which rules??

ur sentence say clearly the monster u r for what u mean clearly to protect powerful indentities of criminals back

as if only the subject looking as an object exist, as if there is no other subject present as if present is only a shape especially a miserable shape

n since when negative thing is for smthg positive? since u r for always anything, so talk about urself knowing that u dont have ancestor

since when piece of crap suffer which mean exclusively subject state is to anything but to the subject himself, piece of crap u

The only choice you have is to 'believe' you are something or to 'find' you are nothing.
But do you even have that choice?
You are going to 'believe' you are some 'thing' definable until you realize you are nothing definable.
The pain of misidentification (the suffering that is the human condition) will eventually lead to the truth.

reply to post by smithjustinb


"For one thing, we have free will with limitations. We are limited in what we can do as humans, so really, at the most, we have only human free will."

An admission of sorts, clearly...what is in question is, where does this FREE WILL 'as humans' - in human form, originate?!...and how would it impact on a decision made through the auspices of FREE WILL to influence a life as a human with the associated 'limited' FREE WILL?
...it is the same choice/decision which influences the pathways inherent in a 'limited' FREE WILL scheme (albeit the limited nature of the FREE WILL in the above mentioned human form)...

It is a truism of sorts to claim that, as a human, You only have human FREE WILL...you are a human in a human form...refer to the pertinent question I posed above pertaining to choosing the limitation...if you cannot remember the choice, you are always going to claim that things are happening 'TO' you - since you don't remember the choice!...and will 'ism' all sorts of excuses for not claiming the choice of your predicament...far easier to blame it on an outside source...abnegation of responsibility!

Being cogs in a grand machine does not absolve you of responsibility - as there is no 'large and small' in that other realm - all is necessary and tends towards equilibrium, by whatever method fits - sometimes this means that a creative force discards/reassigns parts of itself to attain this equilibrium - who are we to question this?

Good and evil, of necessity, in a dualistic realm exist because it is the easiest way to explain it at this level...this, in no way means that it is correct...just necessary to the running of the adjustments...emotions spring from the most basic machinery of the human animal, and so, are ripe for the use in explaining (by extension) the good or evil of the physical world. Point is, this is only the basic machinery which is doing the explaining. Moving out of this paradigm of thought (brought on by lower natures) changes the equation for individuals and groups alike...it is the impulse to use the FREE WILL, in this limited form, to transcend the individualistic nature of earthly existence which prompts the questions - it is no mind trick - it is no failure to feel - it is a realisation of your place in the machinery - you are the machine!

A

reply to post by akushla99


Humans can believe they are some 'thing' definable and the on that conclusion they define the world.
Your only choice is to believe you are some 'thing' definable or to 'find' you are not some 'thing' definable.
Your definition of yourself defines the world you inhabit.
Whereas if you find you are not a 'thing' of definition then the world is not a 'thing' that can be defined.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by akushla99

 

Humans can believe they are some 'thing' definable and the on that conclusion they define the world.
Your only choice is to believe you are some 'thing' definable or to 'find' you are not some 'thing' definable.
Your definition of yourself defines the world you inhabit.
Whereas if you find you are not a 'thing' of definition then the world is not a 'thing' that can be defined.

I agree...but I did not mention 'things'...
Density has a palpable effect...and the nature of that effect is mirrored in the quality which defines its 'thing-ness'...or...an environment is self-referential (by necessity microcosmically and macrocosmically), the 'definition' resides in its limited scope, despite being able to be surmised or understood outside of this scope...
A

reply to post by akushla99


The belief that you are a 'human' in 'human form' is the belief that you are some 'thing'. 'Things' are what are seen, form is what is seen. You are the seer and knower of form (things). If you believe that you are some 'thing', it is you who has believed wrongly. It is a case of misidentification.
If you have mistaken yourself to be something that you are not then then world you percieve is based on a lie.

reply to post by smithjustinb

For one thing, we have free will with limitations.

We have free will within our own realm, but this does not apply when it becomes a universal issue where others and law is involved...

The Imams (as) of the progeny of Muhammed (saw) have taught that it is neither determinism nor free will, but rather, "It is a case between two concerns" Meaning, the answer is in the middle of these two extremes.

Many things we cannot choose, we do not choose our parents, or what place and time we are born, and some thing are circumstances of our parentage and place of birth, however, other things we can choose, we choose daily how we will act and react to situations, and we are the determiners of our behavior. We choose whether to kill, or whether to help others. Therefore, there is neither complete determination, nor complete freewill, to say either or these is to go to an extreme of the matter, but rather, we must say, the truth lies between the extremes.

There is a middle ground. It is this middle we must acknowledge.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by akushla99

 

The belief that you are a 'human' in 'human form' is the belief that you are some 'thing'. 'Things' are what are seen, form is what is seen. You are the seer and knower of form (things). If you believe that you are some 'thing', it is you who has believed wrongly. It is a case of misidentification.
If you have mistaken yourself to be something that you are not then then world you percieve is based on a lie.

You are assuming a little too much on what I have written, and beginning to sound very preachy...You sound like you have a handle on it all, and have no place in a forum such as ATS, but need to start an ashram of your own...an elephant viewed from above or below, is still an elephant! If You truly believed you were not a 'thing'...you would have no need to utilise 'things' to communicate this idea to me or anyone else, and are therefore utilising the 'lie' of identification with 'things' (yourself included) to communicate non-thingness...not so much a paradox, as a humorous, diversionary, philosophical dead-end argument...although the thrust of what you say...I agree with...
A

reply to post by akushla99


So although you agree with the thrust of what i say, you see it as an argument?
Why start an ashram of my own when ATS is a right here and right now?

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by akushla99

 

So although you agree with the trust of what i say, you see it as an argument?
Why start an ashram of my own when ATS is a right here and right now?

edit on 28-4-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

An 'argument' needn't be a stance of opposition...it is a balancing act...we all have truths to share, and you clearly have some...if you can see the 'elephant' from another viewpoint, I want to hear about it...
A

reply to post by akushla99


The word discussion and the word argument are different stances. Words are very important because they define what you are percieving. Many people do not understand the difference between an argument and a discussion because to the one that believes he is a 'human' in 'human form' cannot help but 'argue'. He is defending his position, a position that has come about by the belief that he is some 'thing' definable.

This 'thing' that people believe themselves to be is believed to be destructable. If i believe i can be destroyed then i will have to fight for my survival so i will argue to win. If however i 'find' that i am indestructable i can discuss without the fear of destruction.