"Free will was given to man by god."

[Nick_A]

Henry

N. What the experts call evolution I see as cyclical adaptation. Animal man has evolved as much as it can and now just follows cycles of life which includes Man appearing to devolve into a lower part of the cycle of adaptation. Free will is only possible for conscious evolution which transcends the cycles of lawful adaptation

H, When it comes to culture and society, you're right. Thank goodness I'm stuck in one place. Today, I'm atavistic; tomorrow, I'll be neoteric.
Top

At least you admit it. Our species including you and me will always be forced to deal with suffering. The secular approach is to seek to eliminate it but we see that though we can make our physical lives better, suffering is always present. It is part of the human condition.

“The supernatural greatness of Christianity lies in the fact that it does not seek a supernatural remedy for suffering but a supernatural use for it.” Simone Weil

I've learned that only a few can become impartial enough to open to what is meant. But those who can may experience the purpose of Christianity. It requires free will which we mistake for socially accepted reactions to desire.

[henry quirk]

"Our species including you and me will always be forced to deal with suffering. The secular approach is to seek to eliminate it but we see that though we can make our physical lives better, suffering is always present. It is part of the human condition."

I pretty much just five minutes ago said the same thing to someone in a private message, so: yep.

“The supernatural greatness of Christianity lies in the fact that it does not seek a supernatural remedy for suffering but a supernatural use for it.” Simone Weil

"I've learned that only a few can become impartial enough to open to what is meant. But those who can may experience the purpose of Christianity. It requires free will which we mistake for socially accepted reactions to desire."

Recasted, to suit my heathen deism: The Creator included the possibility of suffering as obstacle to be overcome, not as malignancy to be avoided.

Gird thy loins, sharpen thy sword, death stalks thee; it will take thee: give it hell first.

[Nick_A]

Henry

Recasted, to suit my heathen deism: The Creator included the possibility of suffering as obstacle to be overcome, not as malignancy to be avoided.

My argument with this is that it gives the impression of a personal God seeming to be a sadist. My interest is learning more about the complimentary relationship between science and religion so it is easier to begin with the premise that creation is the body of God functioning within the wholeness of God. Creation is a necessity. If God were to create perfection he would have to create himself which is impossible. The laws of creation were designed to sustain a perpetual necessity.

Conscious Man plays a part in sustaining creation by consciously connecting above and below. Animal man just serves the same purpose the rest of organic life serves which is transforming substances through bodily processes. Unfortunately this process or necessity must include suffering as a necessary aspect of imperfection.

Where creation is God's will, Conscious evolution or the return to the source is possible through God's grace. God's love permeates creation so is available to Man. The human condition makes rejection and denial appear attractive. A human being must choose:

Matthew 16:26

What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?

[henry quirk]

Henry

Recasted, to suit my heathen deism: The Creator included the possibility of suffering as obstacle to be overcome, not as malignancy to be avoided.

My argument with this is that it gives the impression of a personal God seeming to be a sadist. My interest is learning more about the complimentary relationship between science and religion so it is easier to begin with the premise that creation is the body of God functioning within the wholeness of God. Creation is a necessity. If God were to create perfection he would have to create himself which is impossible. The laws of creation were designed to sustain a perpetual necessity.

Conscious Man plays a part in sustaining creation by consciously connecting above and below. Animal man just serves the same purpose the rest of organic life serves which is transforming substances through bodily processes. Unfortunately this process or necessity must include suffering as a necessary aspect of imperfection.

Where creation is God's will, Conscious evolution or the return to the source is possible through God's grace. God's love permeates creation so is available to Man. The human condition makes rejection and denial appear attractive. A human being must choose:

Matthew 16:26

What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?

As A *Deist, I don't have a personal god. There's The Creator or Prime Mover or -- as I like go call him -- **Crom.

I don't see sadism, just opportunity.







*an unconventional one, apparently

**..He dwells on a great mountain. What use to call on him? Little he cares if men live or die. Better to be silent than to call his attention to you; he will send you dooms, not fortune! He is grim and loveless, but at birth ***he breathes power to strive and slay into a man's soul. What else shall men ask of the gods?
Queen of the Black Coast by Robert E. Howard

***a gruesome way of sayin' man is built to strive, assert, and be free.

[Nick_A]

Henry

As A *Deist, I don't have a personal god. There's The Creator or Prime Mover or -- as I like go call him -- **Crom.

I don't see sadism, just opportunity.




*an unconventional one, apparently

**..He dwells on a great mountain. What use to call on him? Little he cares if men live or die. Better to be silent than to call his attention to you; he will send you dooms, not fortune! He is grim and loveless, but at birth ***he breathes power to strive and slay into a man's soul. What else shall men ask of the gods?
Queen of the Black Coast by Robert E. Howard

***a gruesome way of sayin' man is built to strive, assert, and be free.

For me the process of creation and Man within it is a necessity so by definition is serving an essential purpose for the ineffable Source creation exists within..You seem to be saying that striving for survival is without an objective purpose so life and death along with freedom is transient and meaningless. Do I read you right?

[henry quirk]

Henry

As A *Deist, I don't have a personal god. There's The Creator or Prime Mover or -- as I like go call him -- **Crom.

I don't see sadism, just opportunity.




*an unconventional one, apparently

**..He dwells on a great mountain. What use to call on him? Little he cares if men live or die. Better to be silent than to call his attention to you; he will send you dooms, not fortune! He is grim and loveless, but at birth ***he breathes power to strive and slay into a man's soul. What else shall men ask of the gods?
Queen of the Black Coast by Robert E. Howard

***a gruesome way of sayin' man is built to strive, assert, and be free.

For me the process of creation and Man within it is a necessity so by definition is serving an essential purpose for the ineffable Source creation exists within..You seem to be saying that striving for survival is without an objective purpose so life and death along with freedom is transient and meaningless. Do I read you right?

Not at all. There are purposes, but purposes are individual-specific, idiosyncratic. What I ought to be doin', the purpose I was built for, isn't your purpose (and yours isn't Mannie's, and his isn't uwot's, and so forth*). We, human beings, being built to strive, assert, and be free, that in itself is not the endpoint, but the means. The goal or endpoint is that intrinsic purpose.









*bein' simplistic about it: just cuz I'm a hammer doesn't mean you are....you may a reciprocating saw, Mannie might be a bubble level, uwot might be a spectrascope...and on and on

[Nick_A]

Henry

As A *Deist, I don't have a personal god. There's The Creator or Prime Mover or -- as I like go call him -- **Crom.

I don't see sadism, just opportunity.




*an unconventional one, apparently

**..He dwells on a great mountain. What use to call on him? Little he cares if men live or die. Better to be silent than to call his attention to you; he will send you dooms, not fortune! He is grim and loveless, but at birth ***he breathes power to strive and slay into a man's soul. What else shall men ask of the gods?
Queen of the Black Coast by Robert E. Howard

***a gruesome way of sayin' man is built to strive, assert, and be free.

For me the process of creation and Man within it is a necessity so by definition is serving an essential purpose for the ineffable Source creation exists within..You seem to be saying that striving for survival is without an objective purpose so life and death along with freedom is transient and meaningless. Do I read you right?

Not at all. There are purposes, but purposes are individual-specific, idiosyncratic. What I ought to be doin', the purpose I was built for, isn't your purpose (and yours isn't Mannie's, and his isn't uwot's, and so forth*). We, human beings, being built to strive, assert, and be free, that in itself is not the endpoint, but the means. The goal or endpoint is that intrinsic purpose



*bein' simplistic about it: just cuz I'm a hammer doesn't mean you are....you may a reciprocating saw, Mannie might be a bubble level, uwot might be a spectrascope...and on and on

I agree that all human types and people within these types have the feeling of SUBJECTIVE purpose. However I also believe the universe and life within it has an OBJECTIVE purpose humanity as a whole has forgotten. The task for a seeker of truth with the help of great ideas within philosophy and religion is to invite us to remember objective meaning and purpose

We each have a piece of the truth which creates our subjective understanding. There is minority with the need, will, and courage to strive to put the pieces together to experience this wholeness as opposed to continually arguing over who has the better piece.

Of course the secular experts will get a hold of this idea and do their best to devolve it into some sort of PC meaningless feelgoodism. Non the less, the inner quest to experience and reflect objective universal meaning and purpose is still alive in the world even though efforts to destroy it are dominant in society.

Suppose a person believes their purpose is to become rich. they dedicate their life to making money. Then at some point after becoming very wealthy they may feel empty and this feeling makes them commit suicide. What happened? Obviously their purpose became insufficient for the deeper human need for meaning and purpose that is not offered by society. At this point they can become open to receive the experience of objective meaning and purpose the world struggles against.

[Lacewing]

I agree that all human types and people within these types

What are the "types" you're referring to? Please explain.

I also believe the universe and life within it has an OBJECTIVE purpose humanity as a whole has forgotten. The task for a seeker of truth with the help of great ideas within philosophy and religion is to invite us to remember objective meaning and purpose.

So if you believe this is the only possible truth, then you don't believe in any other truth that people find or explore, nor do you believe that any people can be correct in seeing truth differently than you do, right?

There is minority with the need, will, and courage to strive to put the pieces together to experience this wholeness as opposed to continually arguing over who has the better piece.

The minority you speak of sees truth the way you do, correct? How about so many others who see different truths, and they have the need, will, and courage to strive to put the pieces together to experience wholeness? Are they wrong? Or do you think they don't exist?

Of course the secular experts will get a hold of this idea and do their best to devolve it into some sort of PC meaningless feelgoodism.

Why do you try to invalidate any views other than your own with distorted characterizations?

the inner quest to experience and reflect objective universal meaning and purpose is still alive in the world even though efforts to destroy it are dominant in society.

Your statement would make sense to me if you simply removed the word "objective". There are a lot of people who think like I do -- and they're NOT some kind of dominant majority who are destructive. You are pitting one imagined faction against another -- and putting pretty much everyone in the faction that you're not in -- and claiming that "objective universal meaning" is the only real truth that only your limited/minority faction understands.

So you do not appear to appreciate or understand the value and truth of all the other conscious beings on this planet who see and think differently than you do. Correct?

[RCSaunders]

feelings are not under our direct conscious control.

So you don't think it's possible to encounter a situation and ask oneself, do I want to feel "this way" or "this way" about/within this situation?

You can certainly ask yourself if you want to feel a certain way, which is a good idea if what you are feeling indicates something is wrong or if you do not understand why you are feeling as you do. That is often a first step in discovering why you are having feelings you do not like.

I can see how thinking and feeling are tied together -- but it appears to me that I have a choice about how I want to feel. It's like energy. If something unpleasant happens, I may initially feel bad or sad...but I don't want to stay in that, so I shift out of it. I still deal with the situation (so I'm not denying it), and I don't have to like it, but I might choose to feel calm and balanced instead. Or sometimes, in bad situations, I'll choose to laugh instead of cry. It's choosing one kind of energy over another. And it's my understanding that our bodies respond to what we feel more than what we think.

First, it is not our bodie's response to feeling. Our emotional feelings are our bodie's response to whatever we are conscious of, especially what we believe and think. Secondly, since the emotions are an automatic response of our physiology to consciousness, we cannot just decide to have a different feeling.

We can choose to think differently, however, and in that indirect way we can control our emotions. The whole problem with discussing feelings is that they are not simple and most people have no idea what they are or why we have them.

I gave you a link in my previous comment that explains what emotions are and a bit of how they work. This article, "Feelings," is a bit simpler, if you are interested. It is going to be possible to discuss how to control emotions if one does not really know what they are.

If you are really interested in what the emotions are and how have a fulfilling and satisfying emotional life, you might be interested in my 2004, somewhat more technical treatment of the subject, "Feelings—Introduction to the Nature of Emotions."

[RCSaunders]

RCSaunders wrote:

Here is the simple truth. If one is not happy with life it is their own fault and the consequence of their own conscious choices

A justification when you want to keep slaves.

Would keeping slaves make you happy, Belinda?

There is no excuse for doing wrong. It's those who claim something else makes people do what they do rather than their own conscious choice that are excusing wrong.

[RCSaunders]

RCSaunders wrote:

Here is the simple truth. If one is not happy with life it is their own fault and the consequence of their own conscious choices

A justification when you want to keep slaves.

Low, blow, B. It's nothing of the kind.

...

So while there are plenty of genuinely outside oppressive forces in this world -- for all of us, not just for minorities, women, slaves, the poor, etc. -- it's the light of individual choice that keeps us from capitulating to them, of turning them into Fate or Deterministic inevitability. it keeps us from the very kind of thinking that's essential to slavery.

Thanks! It's really simple isn't it?

[henry quirk]

"I also believe the universe and life within it has an OBJECTIVE purpose humanity as a whole has forgotten. The task for a seeker of truth with the help of great ideas within philosophy and religion is to invite us to remember objective meaning and purpose."

I don't believe there's a collective objective purpose. Idiosyncratic objective purpose, mebbe, but not collective.

I'm not an ant; neither are you.

#

"We each have a piece of the truth which creates our subjective understanding. There is minority with the need, will, and courage to strive to put the pieces together to experience this wholeness as opposed to continually arguing over who has the better piece."

Mebbe instead of arguing, each of us ought to just get on with whatever the hell it is we each think we're supposed to be doin' and let things play out as they will.

What fun is the game when everyone stands around debatin' the rules everyone is supposed to follow? No, I'm not doin' that. I got other things to do. I'm doin' 'em. Can't say it bothers me that I'm doin' those things alone. In the end: I'll know if I was right or wrong.

#

"Suppose a person believes their purpose is to become rich. they dedicate their life to making money. Then at some point after becoming very wealthy they may feel empty and this feeling makes them commit suicide. What happened? Obviously their purpose became insufficient for the deeper human need for meaning and purpose that is not offered by society. At this point they can become open to receive the experience of objective meaning and purpose the world struggles against."

If that's the path they got to walk to get from A to Z then that's the path. Mine has been different.

[Nick_A]

I agree that all human types and people within these types

What are the "types" you're referring to? Please explain.

You might call it astrology which is far more meaningful than social astrology you read of. The twelve apostles chosen by Jesus represent the twelve essential human types.

I also believe the universe and life within it has an OBJECTIVE purpose humanity as a whole has forgotten. The task for a seeker of truth with the help of great ideas within philosophy and religion is to invite us to remember objective meaning and purpose.

So if you believe this is the only possible truth, then you don't believe in any other truth that people find or explore, nor do you believe that any people can be correct in seeing truth differently than you do, right?

Yes, there can only be one objective truth yet there is a virtual infinity of partial truths we all perceive differently

There is minority with the need, will, and courage to strive to put the pieces together to experience this wholeness as opposed to continually arguing over who has the better piece.

The minority you speak of sees truth the way you do, correct? How about so many others who see different truths, and they have the need, will, and courage to strive to put the pieces together to experience wholeness? Are they wrong? Or do you think they don't exist?

Imagine all the pieces of jigsw puzzle laid out on table. There is only one way they can be put together to create the whole they are a part of. Yet there are many attempts to put them together which we learn don't work. There is only one way they fit together

Of course the secular experts will get a hold of this idea and do their best to devolve it into some sort of PC meaningless feelgoodism.

Why do you try to invalidate any views other than your own with distorted characterizations?

Why do you degrade the potential for Man to experience meaning and purpose from which partial truths devolve? I admire the minority willing and capable to seek the pearl of great price at the expense of lesser pearls

the inner quest to experience and reflect objective universal meaning and purpose is still alive in the world even though efforts to destroy it are dominant in society.

Your statement would make sense to me if you simply removed the word "objective". There are a lot of people who think like I do -- and they're NOT some kind of dominant majority who are destructive. You are pitting one imagined faction against another -- and putting pretty much everyone in the faction that you're not in -- and claiming that "objective universal meaning" is the only real truth that only your limited/minority faction understands.

So you do not appear to appreciate or understand the value and truth of all the other conscious beings on this planet who see and think differently than you do. Correct?

I am not referring to the battles between conditioned worldly values but rather of awakening to the insufficiency of worldly values to satisfy the calling from the depths of the human heart.

Matthew 10

34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn

“‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’[c]

37 “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.

Awakening in the direction of objective truth is a process violently opposed by the darkness of the world sustained by the battles over conceptions of partial truths. It has been proven over and over again that awareness of the problem of the human condition must be scorned. It disturbs the peace of ignorance. Of course it is rare for a person in this day and age to feel the calling of something greater than earthly values and inevitable hypocrisy and pursue it but some do.

[Belinda]

Lacewing wrote:

Situations do not hold power over a person's ability to choose how they feel.

Bipolar disorder? Torture? Bereavement? Inebriation? Parturition? Winning the lottery? Going to school for the first time when you are five years old? Having a vision of the Virgin Mary? Acute appendicitis?

Good examples, Belinda. They're not exactly something that people experience on a regular basis. Would you be more agreeable if I were to add the word "Generally"? Or do you think that the statement is false -- and (for example) that situations, in general, are stronger than people's consciousness and self-mastery of their feelings?

No, Lacewing. Because whatever example you gave me I'd show how the individual may have been caused to act by causal chains, causal circumstances, and natural laws. The only way someone can be more free than other animals is to use reason.

"Self mastery of feelings" is a top rate example of the uses of reason.

Consciousness is caused not uncaused. I and many others can choose what to think about. We can focus our thoughts and concentrate attention when we choose.

[Immanuel Can]

RCSaunders wrote:



A justification when you want to keep slaves.

Low, blow, B. It's nothing of the kind.

...

So while there are plenty of genuinely outside oppressive forces in this world -- for all of us, not just for minorities, women, slaves, the poor, etc. -- it's the light of individual choice that keeps us from capitulating to them, of turning them into Fate or Deterministic inevitability. it keeps us from the very kind of thinking that's essential to slavery.

Thanks! It's really simple isn't it?

Yeah, I think so.