will precedes choice

[Marblehead]

So what biological choice exists?

Leaf becomes dysfunctional => leaf drops, that is what happens for the deciduous tree, is it not?

Where is the biological choice?

It is cyclical and guaranteed, biologically predetermined, not a biological choice for deciduous trees.

Yeah, There is a difference between instinct (predetermined) and conscious choice.

 

For the tree, there must be some kind of sensor within the tree that tests the functionality of each of its leaves. And then there must be some set standard to determine functionality, and also there must be some switch that is tripped in order to stop supplying a dysfunctional leaf energy.

 

If you plant a tree that is indeginous to Michigan here in North Florida it is very likely that the tree will never lose all its leaves at any one time. Some leaves will remain throughout the winter because the temperatures have not hit the cut-off temperature.

 

 

 

Even this would be an example of biological determinism:

useless leaf => gone

useful leaf => stays

 

Edit here for clarity:

 

" If they (the leaves) remain useful to the tree the tree keeps them."

 

But that is not what we see. Certain species of trees always shed their leaves with the season.

Others not.

Again, it depends on whether or not the tree has been planted where there are distinct seasons.

 

Yes, I like the concept of "useful/useless". Hehehe.

 

So maybe for a tree I should use the word "trigger" rather than "choice"?

 

OK, make the choice to not pee for a week then let me know how much freedom you felt...

Why in the world would I ever consider doing that? It would couse me to become very uncomfortable and likely cause me to pee down my leg.

 

But then there is this story about this post commander during fronteer America who hated his job, where he was assigned, long long he had been assigned there, and was directed by those who knew nothing about the place exactly how to command it. But he said he had not lost all his freedoms because he just pissed his pants and no one could do anything about it.

 

Sensing, observing - no difference in my mind. It's just that different biological sub-systems are endowed with different sets of sensory apparatus. And we are blessed (cursed) with language, which leads to the delusion of choice.

Apparently so. Hehehe. Yes, much of the life forms operate from instincts so that they do not need a complex brain and central nervous system.

 

I am pretty sure that fish do not continue eating when there is food around after reaching the state of being full. Do they consciously decide to stop eating or is the a float in their stomach that closes their mouth when the stomach is full?

 

The delusion of choice. What a pretty phrase. Now, you can't tell me that you operate strictly by instinct. (Except when you are in a full "wu wei" state.) You, I and everyone else make conscious choices. I will, however, agree that the choices for many are extremely limited.

 

Consciousness does not necessarily imply control or choice.

It certainly does create the opportunity for there to be a (deluded) assumption of control and choice.

You are right. I really do try to stay away from universal statements. But I will suggest that the amount of freedom for choice will vary greatly between individuals. Some are in chains and others are free wanderers.

 

Yup, still with you. Nice discussion, thanks.

Same here. You made me think pretty hard this time. And better still, I'm not even sure I agree with me. But I can never think of these things on my own because from my point of view I am always right even when I am dead wrong. Always better to talk with someone.

[Marblehead]

I hear you.. but it sounds like you simply like to exchange words/semantics to make something more comfortable or acceptable... that's not wu wei nor ziran nor dao. That is man exerting his idea of self-will instead of realizing what it is.

That has always been a given, hasn't it? Especially with me (and maybe ChiDragon).

 

I am never in Wu Wei when I am signed in on this forum.

 

The Dao/Way offers a blueprint for existence. You are not able to stray outside of the blueprint.

That is true. But I am free, having free will as I do, to test all the limits. And then I can make the choice to not try to go beyond what I feel is a safe limit. IAnd I still even try to violate that on occassion.)

[doc benway]

Yeah, There is a difference between instinct (predetermined) and conscious choice.

 

For the tree, there must be some kind of sensor within the tree that tests the functionality of each of its leaves. And then there must be some set standard to determine functionality, and also there must be some switch that is tripped in order to stop supplying a dysfunctional leaf energy.

 

If you plant a tree that is indeginous to Michigan here in North Florida it is very likely that the tree will never lose all its leaves at any one time. Some leaves will remain throughout the winter because the temperatures have not hit the cut-off temperature.

 

 

 

Again, it depends on whether or not the tree has been planted where there are distinct seasons.

 

 

Yes, I like the concept of "useful/useless". Hehehe.

So maybe for a tree I should use the word "trigger" rather than "choice"?

 

A trigger seems like a far cry from free will or choice, it seems much more mechanized.

 

 

Why in the world would I ever consider doing that? It would couse me to become very uncomfortable and likely cause me to pee down my leg.

 

But then there is this story about this post commander during fronteer America who hated his job, where he was assigned, long long he had been assigned there, and was directed by those who knew nothing about the place exactly how to command it. But he said he had not lost all his freedoms because he just pissed his pants and no one could do anything about it.

 

Apparently so. Hehehe. Yes, much of the life forms operate from instincts so that they do not need a complex brain and central nervous system.

 

I am pretty sure that fish do not continue eating when there is food around after reaching the state of being full. Do they consciously decide to stop eating or is the a float in their stomach that closes their mouth when the stomach is full?

 

I've seen pet fish eat themselves to death.

 

 

 

You made me think pretty hard this time. And better still, I'm not even sure I agree with me. But I can never think of these things on my own because from my point of view I am always right even when I am dead wrong. Always better to talk with someone.

Yeah, it does seem that you're trying pretty hard to rationalize a belief.

I'm just sharing a perspective, not really claiming it to be "true", but it certainly seems to fit my experience better than the widely accepted story we generally abide by.

[Marblehead]

A trigger seems like a far cry from free will or choice, it seems much more mechanized.

True. But look at some of the people you see on the streets.

 

I've seen pet fish eat themselves to death.

Yep. and other animals as well. Perhaps there is a "I've had enough" trigger that is not functioning properly?

 

Yeah, it does seem that you're trying pretty hard to rationalize a belief.

I'm just sharing a perspective, not really claiming it to be "true", but it certainly seems to fit my experience better than the widely accepted story we generally abide by.

Just having a conversation with a friend. The end result doesn't really matter.

 

So we have free will, conditioned responses, and instinctual responses. If they help us through our life they are all good, aren't they?

[doc benway]

So we have free will, conditioned responses, and instinctual responses. If they help us through our life they are all good, aren't they?

 

I'm not convinced that we've established the first...

And if we have, I'm not sure I've yet determined where that lies and how it occurs.

 

An interesting offshoot of this conversation occurred to me this morning.

Earlier you mentioned triggers and trees.

I think it's interesting to look at what that means.

Why do all deciduous trees in a geographic region shed their leaves at the same time ever year?

To me that implies an intelligence, an awareness, something like that at a level that supersedes that of the individual tree.

It points to both a higher level of awareness and organization but also to the inseparability of the tree from it's environment.

Similarly one can think about the intelligence of a river and where it lies (river bed, organisms living within it, local geothermal conditions, mountain, etc...).

One can extend this thought process to planet, solar system, galaxy, etc...

And to our species which holds itself out and above all others due to the verbal nature of thought...

This is the foundation for apprehending one-ness at a material level.

At the level of consciousness and awareness it becomes a bit of a different but related discussion.

Anyway, something that jumped into my head this am and I thought I'd share.

[Rara]

i don't know who Sam Harris is. you should post one of the videos.

 

As promised:

 

Sam Harris' 20 min vid reading an excerpt from his book:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf9eGUWGtyo

 

A far longer lecture:

 

 

Worth a watch, both of them. Some very good points!

[Marblehead]

Hi Steve,

 

I'm not convinced that we've established the first...

And if we have, I'm not sure I've yet determined where that lies and how it occurs.

I know that Steve.

 

And I will continue to exert my free will even if it is 99.9% conditioned. Free will works for me so I decided to keep it.

 

An interesting offshoot of this conversation occurred to me this morning.

Earlier you mentioned triggers and trees.

No, I'm not going there with you Steve. You know me better than that. Hehehe. Intelligence is greatly over-rated. I have seen some human animals who showed no signs of intelligence whatever.

 

There is so much of the physical universe that I have no explanation for. Things happen according to the processes of nature. This much I feel secure in stating. What these precesses are is often way beyond my capacity for observing and understanding.

 

But maybe you and 3bob can discuss your suppositions above?

Edited August 26, 2013 by Marblehead

[doc benway]

Hi Steve,

 

I know that Steve.

 

And I will continue to exert my free will even if it is 99.9% conditioned. Free will works for me so I decided to keep it.

 

No, I'm not going there with you Steve. You know me better than that. Hehehe. Intelligence is greatly over-rated. I have seen some human animals who showed no signs of intelligence whatever.

Nearly all human animals have intelligence. The issue is that most are sound asleep.

 

 

 

There is so much of the physical universe that I have no explanation for. Things happen according to the processes of nature. This much I feel secure in stating. What these precesses are is often way beyond my capacity for observing and understanding.

And yet, there is no intelligence?

What does that say about yours?

 

Nature is clearly highly intelligent. We are an expression of that as are all other living things at individual, cellular, and species levels. It's just that the intelligence has a different appearance depending on the level of organization. If you don't like the word intelligence, that's fine. Certainly there is organization, integration, and so forth, with a very predictable, elegant, and specific manifestation.

 

And no need to worry, none of this implies or presupposes a separate creator, designer, supreme being, or what have you.

That is simply an anthropomorphic projection of the limits of human imagination and insight.

It is all highly intelligent and completely Ziran.

And no need to go there if your tidy, materialistic rationale feels threatened...

 

 

But maybe you and 3bob can discuss your suppositions above?

I'd be happy to elaborate if there's anything specific you're referring to.

 

Looking forward to watching the Sam Harris videos.

He's a bright guy and I've read one of his books and a few of his talks.

Thanks for posting those, Rara.

[Rara]

No problemo. Quite liberating to watch and brings things down to earth in a strange sort of way. Really messes with one's morals for sure! presume the book you read was the older one. Think he only has two?

[Marblehead]

And yet, there is no intelligence?

What does that say about yours?

I have never claimed all that much.

 

Funny. Me? Feel threatened? I don't think so. I have no desire to go places where I would likely have very little positive input to offer.

 

And you know what? My materialistic world works just fine. And all my tropical vines lose their leaves in the winter and that is because I don't live in the tropics. Oh well.

[doc benway]

I have never claimed all that much.

More than you think!

 

 

Funny. Me? Feel threatened? I don't think so. I have no desire to go places where I would likely have very little positive input to offer.

Fair enough

 

 

And you know what? My materialistic world works just fine. And all my tropical vines lose their leaves in the winter and that is because I don't live in the tropics. Oh well.

It certainly does.

 

Nice bantering with you.

[Marblehead]

More than you think!

Well, I think it only fair to consider that I am hard-headed. After all, how much more hard-headed can one get if one is already a marblehead?

 

It certainly does.

Yeah, a rich, happy life isn't all that hard to attain. Gotta' watch out for materialism though. It is useful but it can be addictive.

 

Nice bantering with you.

Same here.

 

Have we figured out whether the chicken precedes the egg or if the egg precedes the chicken yet?

 

But then, does it really matter?

[doc benway]

Have we figured out whether the chicken precedes the egg or if the egg precedes the chicken yet?

yes, they are mutually arising (Daoist) and dependently originating (Buddhist).

 

 

But then, does it really matter?

Only if you are a matter-ialist.

[Marblehead]

yes, they are mutually arising (Daoist) and dependently originating (Buddhist).

That caused me to think, "A marriage between Rene and Vaj."

 

Only if you are a matter-ialist.

The only thing I know for sure is that they both are edible.

[roger]

what precedes will?

 

ergo... will is simply following...

 

Purpose precedes will. Love precedes purpose. Love is First Cause.

 

The illusion is that BELIEF determines your will, and therefore your choices. The reality is that will precedes belief, it doesn't follow it. You believe what you WANT to believe. Therefore you're FREE, you're not imprisoned by your beliefs. You believe what you need to believe to fulfill your purpose.

 

This is my opinion but I acknowledge I could be mistaken.

[Marblehead]

Purpose precedes will. Love precedes purpose. Love is First Cause.

 

The illusion is that BELIEF determines your will, and therefore your choices. The reality is that will precedes belief, it doesn't follow it. You believe what you WANT to believe. Therefore you're FREE, you're not imprisoned by your beliefs. You believe what you need to believe to fulfill your purpose.

 

This is my opinion but I acknowledge I could be mistaken.

So you are saying that when someone offers me a personal insult they did it because of love?

[doc benway]

So you are saying that when someone offers me a personal insult they did it because of love?

I think that is generally the case.

Most insults are an exaggeration offered by someone who is disturbed and taking it out on you.

They are generally astute and bitter enough to try and make the barb accurate enough to cause you harm.

Hence, they are offering you an unprecedented (well, maybe not in your case... ) opportunity to learn and grow.

[roger]

So you are saying that when someone offers me a personal insult they did it because of love?

 

Ultimately.

 

What I believe is that everything is happening perfectly, exactly as it's supposed to. As Steve said, it's an opportunity to learn and grow.

 

Lack of love and attack are only illusions. The thing is that people aren't fully CONSCIOUS of their true motives, which in actual truth, are always loving.

 

An interesting quote by Descartes is, "The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of."

 

In reality, man is ethically perfect.

[Marblehead]

In reality, man is ethically perfect.

I will, without further question, accept that this is what you believe.

 

(Your thoughts are nice though. Keep them, okay?)

[roger]

Thanks MH.

 

I will try to keep my loving thoughts, and let go of my fear thoughts.

 

ACIM says, "Give up what you don't want, and keep what you do. How simple is the obvious!"

 

Peace.

[Marblehead]

ACIM says, "Give up what you don't want, and keep what you do. How simple is the obvious!"

Chuang Tzu said that too with different words. Yes, obvious, isn't it? That's not so hard in the material; it's in our mental realm where this is a bit more difficult.

 

I hope no one cares that we got off topic but what we are talking about is important in life too. More important, I think than feeling we know if will precedes choice because what we are talking about pertains to the life we have to live.

 

I have tried so hard to think as you are suggesting but I have been hurt far too many times to even think that it is even possible any more.

 

But still, we do need peace, love and harmony in our inner essence else we will never be at peace with our Self.

[roger]

Roger.. as well as believing this..are you at a stage where you consistently feel this as a reality in your day to day living.

 

I very much agree with you, it is a great truth underlying things.

 

Cat, I definitely stand a lot of room for improvement. I'm still somewhat out of control of my emotions. I'm not grounded much of the time.

 

Thanks for asking, and what about yourself? Is it more of just a concept you believe in, or have you integrated it into spiritual perception and experience?

 

I have tried so hard to think as you are suggesting but I have been hurt far too many times to even think that it is even possible any more.

 

MH, I have a suggestion for you that could possibly utterly empower you to think in this higher way, but it might require some deep reflection on your part......you will have to open your mind to what I'm saying.

 

Neale Donald Walsch healed a woman on one of his retreats profoundly. He did this by helping her to see the "perfection" of a tragedy her son had been through. He didn't just TELL her "it was perfect"....he helped her to see HOW it was perfect. If he had just told her it was perfect, it would have undoubtedly offended her.

 

You see, the truth is that love is all there is, everyone loves everyone and no one ever does anything unloving.

 

Emmanuel (a channeled, non-physical entity) said once, "You are here to ask only one question, 'What is the nature of love where love seems not to be?'"

 

When someone mistreats or hurts you, it can seem difficult to see what they did as perfect and loving. Why? Because we don't SEE the love, because it doesn't SEEM loving and perfect.

 

BUT, if you DID see the love, you would be healed.

 

The technique I'm suggesting is that you use this as an INSIGHT that can help you to have FAITH in the love where love only seems not to be. Because you know that IF you could see that love, you would feel better, because you have that INSIGHT, you are empowered to have faith.

 

I hope this helps.

[roger]

I had a HUGE insight just now and I feel very certain that it's true. I can't really explain how I know that, but I know that it applies to me, and I believe it applies to everyone.

 

It's that it's never a person's behavior that hurts or offends us, it's always that we think they don't love us.

 

My brother-in-law once said to my sister, "What am I chopped liver?" It wasn't her behavior that offended him, it's that he thought he was "chopped liver" to her.

 

We get hurt because we think the person fails to love us, not in their behavior, but in their HEARTS.

 

Some of you may agree that the Universe is conscious, that it's actually alive. Well, The Universe speaks to a man named Mike Dooley, and in one of his "Notes from the Universe" books, the Universe says:

 

"There is no one in your life who hasn't always loved you, they're just learning how to show it."

 

And God said to Neale Donald Walsch, "You don't love more or less, you just love." We don't love to different degrees, we just love, absolutely and fully.

 

In a literal, absolute sense, everyone loves everyone maximally, equally, and unconditionally, they're just not fully conscious of that love.

 

 

I just want to say one more thing about this because I think it's very important, and it certainly fully applies to the idea of taking offense or getting hurt.

 

 

 

I think it's always something about ourselves that we're really hurt about. It's never really the other person's apparent lack of love, but always that we either think they're right not to love us, we think we're unlovable, or we otherwise feel guilty and ashamed.

 

The above example is very significant. It's wasn't that my brother-in-law got hurt because he thought my sister saw him as chopped liver, it's that he thought he IS chopped liver.

 

If someone insults you or attacks you, and you get hurt, it's always because of some fault you find with yourself.

 

ACIM says, "This point is so important that it cannot be overemphasized. You never hate a brother for his sins, but always for your own."

 

And those sins are only illusion.

Edited September 3, 2013 by roger

[Marblehead]

MH, I have a suggestion for you that could possibly utterly empower you to think in this higher way, but it might require some deep reflection on your part......you will have to open your mind to what I'm saying.

Hi Roger,

 

I know that this condition exists in reality. I have experienced it on occasion. I'm not really arguing with you or suggesting that you are delusional. But I am attempting to point out that most people do not operate from the level you are speaking to. And I think it is dangerous to open ourself up to all that "loving kindness" that we are going to get from everyone on the planet.

 

Some people will only want to take advantage of you and your kindness. Sure, one could say this doesn't matter but I suggest that it does matter.

 

My sister lost one of her sons and we spoke about his death a number of times and she is finally at peace with what happened. I'm not saying I had anything to do with her coming to terms with what happened, I'm just saying that her being able to talk about it may have helped.

 

Because of my personal experiences with life I have placed the word "love" in the basket with many other four-letter words. The word has too many connotations, some of them actually negative or degrading, and it is horribly misused for the purpose of taking advantage of others.

 

It's that it's never a person's behavior that hurts or offends us, it's always that we think they don't love us.

Okay. You done good, from your point of view.

 

I always consider what you are speaking to as being part of what I call us putting our expectations on others. Nothing to do with love.

[Formless Tao]

People ask, if everything is part of a plan, or if "all is as it should be," then what about free-will. Doesn't that take away our free-will? One way to look at it is that our WILL determines our CHOICE, but choice DOES NOT determine our will. Everyone is always "choicelessly" doing their own will, which happens to be the will of God/Tao/love/All That Is, however you wanna put it. We have free-will, but we DO NOT have "choice". Btw, I got the idea that we don't have choice from ACIM, where it says that the concept of choice is "not of God," and that while choice is an illusion, it nevertheless has meaning and value IN THIS WORLD.

 

"Everything is forseen, but freedom of action is granted."

 

The Talmud