Philosophy Now Forum

We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

That is like asking how can the cat meow when it is chained to a dog.

'we' are free because of who and what 'we' Truly ARE.

become an Solipsist - then the "body" is noting mroe that thought.

of course i may just be talking to myself.

of course i am per my viewpoint - per emprisism i cannot know otherwise.

bahman wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 5:24 pm We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

It seem like people on this board can't comprehend being a antirealist on physical/natural laws.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 11:31 am That is like asking how can the cat meow when it is chained to a dog.

'we' are free because of who and what 'we' Truly ARE.

What do you mean?

gaffo wrote: ↑Sun Jun 20, 2021 12:07 am become an Solipsist - then the "body" is noting mroe that thought.

of course i may just be talking to myself.

of course i am per my viewpoint - per emprisism i cannot know otherwise.

Solipsism is wrong.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Jun 20, 2021 12:25 am

bahman wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 5:24 pm We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

It seem like people on this board can't comprehend being a antirealist on physical/natural laws.

We have been through this.

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jun 20, 2021 12:04 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Jun 20, 2021 12:25 am

bahman wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 5:24 pm We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

It seem like people on this board can't comprehend being a antirealist on physical/natural laws.

We have been through this.

Which is what makes it odd that you seem to not be aware of it as a possibility.

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jun 20, 2021 12:01 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 11:31 am That is like asking how can the cat meow when it is chained to a dog.

'we' are free because of who and what 'we' Truly ARE.

What do you mean?

In relation to what PART, EXACTLY?

If you repeat the ACTUAL WORD/S, which you want me to tell you what it/they mean, then this HELPS TREMENDOUSLY here.

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jun 20, 2021 12:02 pm

gaffo wrote: ↑Sun Jun 20, 2021 12:07 am become an Solipsist - then the "body" is noting mroe that thought.

of course i may just be talking to myself.

of course i am per my viewpoint - per emprisism i cannot know otherwise.

Solipsism is wrong.

ok, you have me convenience

What makes a human free may reside in a context that precedes that what can be comprehended by empirical science. An indication that this may be true is the fact that as of today empirical science has been unable to explain the origin of life and consciousness (the 'Hard Problem' of philosophy).

What are we, and what are we free from and free to do?

Is the we, the sense of agency? The sense of an experiencer? And is the experiencer the same one as the agent, or can they become decoupled?

We know there are times when there is not a sense of agency. For example, when performing well rehearsed actions or behaviours. So does this mean we are conditionally free? Surely if there was such a thing as free will, it would be the base state.

If free will is conditional, what are the conditions and can one be more free than another? And if so, can one be so free as to exist completely separate from conditioning, or be so chained as to be completely chained to one’s conditioning?

theory wrote: ↑Fri Jun 25, 2021 2:39 pm What makes a human free may reside in a context that precedes that what can be comprehended by empirical science. An indication that this may be true is the fact that as of today empirical science has been unable to explain the origin of life and consciousness (the 'Hard Problem' of philosophy).

Science (materialism) is going to the wrong way. So no hope if it ever can explain freedom in terms of matter which is determined.

Dimebag wrote: ↑Mon Jun 28, 2021 7:46 am What are we, and what are we free from and free to do?

We are free agents with mind and body. We are free to decide and acts when there are options.

Dimebag wrote: ↑Mon Jun 28, 2021 7:46 am Is the we, the sense of agency? The sense of an experiencer? And is the experiencer the same one as the agent, or can they become decoupled?

Well, it depends on what do you mean with agent. If it is mind then experiencer is the agent. If it is the person, mind and body, then they are different.

Dimebag wrote: ↑Mon Jun 28, 2021 7:46 am We know there are times when there is not a sense of agency. For example, when performing well rehearsed actions or behaviours. So does this mean we are conditionally free? Surely if there was such a thing as free will, it would be the base state.

We cannot be conditionally free but situationally free.

Dimebag wrote: ↑Mon Jun 28, 2021 7:46 am If free will is conditional, what are the conditions and can one be more free than another? And if so, can one be so free as to exist completely separate from conditioning, or be so chained as to be completely chained to one’s conditioning?

We are free from conditioning when there are options to proceed.

bahman wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 5:24 pm We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

I can grasp the last part, of your statement. As a reactionary isolation, which, given the symbiosis context of the last statement, is "peaceful".

In terms of the question, an equivalent concern of that issue is supporting the inevitability as a peace, when the means for the practitioner consists of the death of physics.