The Death of Free Will

[Immanuel Can]

Declarations, previously reasoned.

- A human is a catalyst.
- A catalyst is part of change, but does not change.
- Change does not require free will.
- Change only requires a motive force.
- Motive force in humans is initiated by either defined or undefined need.

Yeah, I'm not fully caffeinated yet, so I'm slow & dull.

You're sayin' there is no free will, that man is not a free will?

I don't have an issue with the proposition, "Motivation in humans often comes from some kind of practical need." That simply seems obvious.

The problem, though, is that "need" might or might not include things that are not strictly material or physical "needs," such as the "need" for achievement, the "need" for acceptance, the "need" for meaningful action, the "need" for a sense of mission, the "need" to be moral, the "need" for God, the "need" for relationship, the "need" for self-determination, the "need" for a community, and so on...all of which strain the term "need" far beyond the bounds of mere material causality.

And if humans can be "motivated" by such things (Is it not totally obvious that they frequently are?), then it's actually an admission of free will. It says that human beings can choose and act based on immaterial and abstract concerns, not merely because their last dinner settled well or badlly.

Fine with me.

[henry quirk]

Declarations, previously reasoned.

- A human is a catalyst.
- A catalyst is part of change, but does not change.
- Change does not require free will.
- Change only requires a motive force.
- Motive force in humans is initiated by either defined or undefined need.

Yeah, I'm not fully caffeinated yet, so I'm slow & dull.

You're sayin' there is no free will, that man is not a free will?

I don't have an issue with the proposition, "Motivation in humans often comes from some kind of practical need." That simply seems obvious.

The problem, though, is that "need" might or might not include things that are not strictly material or physical "needs," such as the "need" for achievement, the "need" for acceptance, the "need" for meaningful action, the "need" for a sense of mission, the "need" to be moral, the "need" for God, the "need" for relationship, the "need" for self-determination, the "need" for a community, and so on...all of which strain the term "need" far beyond the bounds of mere material causality.

And if humans can be "motivated" by such things (Is it not totally obvious that they frequently are?), then it's actually an admission of free will. It says that human beings can choose and act based on immaterial and abstract concerns, not merely because their last dinner settled well or badlly.

Fine with me.

If that's what Walker meant, then I'm good with it.

still not fully caffeinated and it's almost 2:30 in the afternoon: it's been one of one of them days

[Walker]

The problem, though, is that "need" might or might not include things that are not strictly material or physical "needs," such as the "need" for achievement, the "need" for acceptance, the "need" for meaningful action, the "need" for a sense of mission, the "need" to be moral, the "need" for God, the "need" for relationship, the "need" for self-determination, the "need" for a community, and so on...all of which strain the term "need" far beyond the bounds of mere material causality.

Well said, I must say. Very clear exposition of the way things are.

Thank you for turning your attention to this matter, in all sincerity, and offering the opportunity to expound, incorporating the clarity further, under the umbrella of need, and the fact that every action that gets done, had to get done.

Humans are indeed complex. However, what is the purpose of fulfilling these needs? Why are these even considered to be needs?

Answer: The purpose of fulfilling the needs, the pursuit to fulfill the needs, is indeed physical because the pursuit of fulfillment, and indeed at times the fulfillment itself, generates naturally, physically-desired peace-of-mind.

Peace-of-mind is a physical phenomenon towards which humans naturally move. And, because humans are so complex, so are the elements generating peace-of-mind, for each.

Peace-of-mind is the gold ring towards which humans naturally reach. It is the ultimate objective of change.

If this desire for peace-of-mind is not present, peace-of-mind has been, and is, revealed, and is in fact present for awareness. Desire is then non-existent, at least until it again physically reappears, perhaps as thirst for water, if the thirsty has not yet yielded to the curious, strange and unfamiliar physical sensations of total surrender as the body dries up.

Indeed, we can say that although the elements leading up to peace-of-mind can be generated via religious practices that must include an open heart to be effective, the actual peace-of-mind state itself strips away much ignorance, much dukkha, to open up glimpses of unconditional Turiya to awareness.

I do think that after careful and objective contemplation, you will find that this too, is fine with you, IC, and Henry.

[henry quirk]

yep, I'm not understandn' one damn bit of that, W

[Immanuel Can]

The purpose of fulfilling the needs, the pursuit to fulfill the needs, is indeed physical because the pursuit of fulfillment, and indeed at times the fulfillment itself, generates naturally, physically-desired peace-of-mind.

No, no, I would say that's not correct, W.

"Peace of mind" isn't even a thing, in a Materialist world. "Mind" isn't a thing, far less the thoughts in it. Only "brain" exists, according to Materialism, and "mind" is just an "epiphenomenon," an utterly inexplicable side effect that "emerges" without any causes itself, when the brain develops to a particular level.

I know. It's a dumb story, and you and I can have lots of questions about it. But that's how the story goes. Good thing it's their story, not ours.

So "peace of mind" is not a physical phenomenon. I think what you are pointing to is that "peace of mind" issues in certain physiological symptoms...lowered breathing rate, perhaps, less anxiety, different hormone balances in the system, etc. But these are manifestly effects of peace-of-mind, not causes of it. Peace-of-mind can be induced by completely non-physical causes, such as the adjustment of the perspective of the mind, without a single change happening in the external circumstances...as when a person "comes to terms" with an illness or impending death. Nothing physiological or situational has changed; but peace-of-mind comes anyway.

I'm all in favour of people having peace-of-mind; but it's not a physical phenomenon. In fact, we must ask ourselves what the "of mind" adds to the totality, if circumstances are all that is involved. Perhaps we should distinguish between factual, circumstantial "peace," as when hostilities cease, and "peace-of-mind," which may or may not be accompanied by factual "peace."

[Walker]

Well fellers, since you took the time I'll sure enough give that some thought.

[Walker]

The Cozy-Chat method of transmission, identified and monikered by HexHammer, an early guide to PN:

Folks used to say they were “surfing,” the internet. I wonder, is there a new word for that? Is it now something more sinister, like what happened to rap?

While surfing around I found this curiosity and wondered, since this person I’ve never heard of in the video is said to be an “actress,” is she acting in this video, or …

… has her peace-of-mind physically, and uncontrollable, been disrupted to the point where her tear ducts are activated and her nose starts running and her feet start smelling, all confused and dis-ordered?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OT9AXEJSzNk

Which leads to the philosophical questioning of what’s real … true, someone is acting that way, but why? Is it true. It is a choice? If it’s a choice, why make that choice?

Well, it relates to a provocative thought expressed by a seasoned journalist that I paused over, while surfing. How is it that so many spontaneous demonstrations just broke out in Cuba, unbeknownst to, or should we say allowed by, the government that has many spies and police? This question is pondered because totalitarian regimes in the past created bait conditions that actually created the unrest, in order to crush any opposition. Rile up the radicals and expose the intelligentsia to the effects of protest under totalitarian conditions.

It is to wonder, but connecting the relevant dots on the Path of Points between the actress expressing her range of emotions and the Cuban government recently, physically attacking the Cuban citizens within a situation that could have been instigated, may stretch the courtesy of indulgence one tad too much.

However, I did realize, if that actress is on the level, then I’m sure as hell not going to assume any immunity from whatever that there social-media stuff did to her physically that caused her to publish losing control of some physical orifices, so it’s rather fortunate that particular stress test has eluded yours truly, via lack of need for such goings-on.

People freaking out while saying words that were silly not long ago (tic tock the mouse ran up the clock) words that signify communications platforms … I think comprehension of their confusions, and its relationship as a motive force for action that points to what it was that had to be done, such understanding of the root, need not hinge on experiencing such a resulting need, oneself.

[Walker]

…

After a pause:

- Obviously, peace-of-mind is no minor thing.

- Rather, peace-of-mind pursuit, getting things back to right again, is the root motive force for humans, with applicable animal variants.

- The logical error being committed in missing the association of the material world with peace-of-mind is the error of ego that holds peace-of-mind to be apart from physicality.

- This is because peace of mind, which is bliss (satchitananda … being, consciousness, bliss) is not conditioned by the body, however the body is the vehicle to clearing the debris that obscures the obvious.

- Recommended reference: Patanjali’s yoga sutras, yoga meaning the “yolking,” of awareness and body as one.

[henry quirk]

Yeah, no offense but I don't give a flip about peace of mind. I got mine and it comes as a nice, but minor, benefit from pursuin' other things. It, peace of mind, was not, is not, a goal for me.

When the conversation moves back to free will I'll mebbe have things to say (though, probably, I'll just be repeatin' myself [cuz the subject is really played out]).

[Walker]

Peace of mind is the reason you eat food.

Eating restores the peace of mind disrupted by hunger because it sets things right again.

[Walker]

…

After a pause:

- Obviously, peace-of-mind is no minor thing.

- Rather, peace-of-mind pursuit, getting things back to right again, is the root motive force for humans, with applicable animal variants.

- The logical error being committed in missing the association of the material world with peace-of-mind is the error of ego that holds peace-of-mind to be apart from physicality.

- This is because peace of mind, which is bliss (satchitananda … being, consciousness, bliss) is not conditioned by the body, however the body is the vehicle to clearing the debris that obscures the obvious.

- Recommended reference: Patanjali’s yoga sutras, yoga meaning the “yolking,” of awareness and body as one. *

edit:
Uhh, that's yoking, not yolking.

(now it's right, and peace of mind ensues.)

[henry quirk]

Peace of mind is the reason you eat food.

Eating restores the peace of mind disrupted by hunger because it sets things right again.

No. I eat cuz I get hungry. I eat to fuel myself so I can go do stuff. Now, my buddy Louis -- a rather portly fellow -- loves food and the whole experience of food, food prep, food as art, etc. Me, I think he's just a fattie, but he might agree his peace of mind is furthered by eatin'.

Again: peace of mind, as I reckon it, is a *benefit, a side effect (and a mostly unimportant one) of doin' things. In itself, peace of mind, as a goal, is a rainbow (chase it if you like...me, I got better things to do).

Anywho: let me know when free will comes up...




*and mebbe not always a benefit...peace of mind can lead to inertia (where you sit on your satisfied keister as the house burns around you)

[Walker]

All the stuff you do is for peace of mind, which ensues when hunger pain is abated, and the bills are paid.

I would have to hear the reasoned case for why one's house burning down around one generates peace of mind, which is not to say there isn't a case to be made.

[Walker]

A good example is abortion.

Women get abortions for peace-of-mind.

Ego's actions don't always have intended consequences.

[henry quirk]

All the stuff you do is for peace of mind, which ensues when hunger pain is abated, and the bills are paid.

Nope.


I would have to hear the reasoned case for why one's house burning down around one generates peace of mind, which is not to say there isn't a case to be made.

*sigh*

The burnin' house is a metaphor...and it burnin' isn't the source of peace of mind ...instead, bein' all peaceful can make one complacent in the face of disaster.