no one is guilty

[Marblehead]

Having real 'free will' means being able to be a 'first cause' in the universe--a cause that is absolutely not caused or connected to any previous set of causes, hence, is not part of the existing causal stream. This is the ONLY way that real responsibility can be conferred--to First Causes, because they are Necessary Causes. All other events in a causal stream are Proximate causes, or we might think of them as continuing the wave, but never starting it.

 

From your perspective only the Big Bang was first cause" but yet something caused Singularity to "Bang". 

 

Your association is not valid at the individual level.

 

I can refuse to turn the pond pumps back on after I have given them a short break and all the fish would die.  I have life and death control over the fish in my ponds.  And I have the free will to turn the pumps back on or just leave them off.

[Marblehead]

We do not spring into existence from nothing. In fact, nothing in our experience does, including our intentions and will power. No one will ever be able to find an example of an act they performed that came into being without being connected to everything that came before in their lives--every little experiential detail, and then further and further until the whole universe to the beginning of time is included. There is no stopping the causal connection wave. That is the reason why 'responsibility' is a false concept, and isnt 'real' in any ontological sense. Like the cave of diamonds, the light touches every corner, binding all together in one single manifold.

 

You are suggesting here that man is nothing but a puppet being moved with strings that others are holding and totally incapable of original thought.  I totally disagree with this.

 

Remember, not only do we have free will (within limits) but we can also make choice based upon our own original thought.

 

We remain responsible for all our thoughts, words and deeds because we have free will and the power to make choices based on original thought.

[Marblehead]

I would say this though--that there might be a possibility of real true spontaneous action arising at the highest levels of cultivation. The sage, a friend of emptyness, might find a state akin to the original spark that kickstarts a universe unfolding. Maybe. But lets face it, such creatures are few and far between, truly rare and, relatively speaking, rather wonderful beings. They make a special case.

 

I am so glad you mentioned this so that I don't have to disagree with everything you said in the post.

 

Yes, the Sage is a perfect example.  If there is one then it indicates that there is the possibility for the existence of many, many more.

 

Spontaneous acts of kindness.

[Marblehead]

For the rest of us, there is pretty much zero chance that anything we do is actually truly spontaneous in the sense of being a First Cause. That decision to murder someone doesnt just appear out of thin air. It is the consequence of a whole lifetime of previous experiences and their natural outcome in that person.

 

Don't sell your self and others short.  Potential (Mystery) is unlimited until it becomes manifest.

 

But yes, I will agree with you that cause and effect play a very important part in our life.  Avoid the cause - no effect.

 

 

PS  I enjoyed your post.  I enjoyed presenting an alternate perspective.  Our base philosophies differ so naturally we will hold different perspectives regarding many matters.  Doesn't mean that either of us are wrong - only different.

Edited January 24, 2017 by Marblehead

[dwai]

[roger]

There is no free will. That is part of our collective delusion

 

Spinoza is one of the philosophers who taught that our will arises out of our understanding, and therefore isn't truly "free."

 

In other words, we MUST do what our understanding points to, therefore there is no free will.

 

The problem with this teaching is that it doesn't see that our WILL CREATES OUR UNDERSTANDING, not vice versa.

 

In other words, will PRECEDES understanding; it doesn't FOLLOW it.

 

New Age understanding is that there is only ONE "will"- and all beings share that will.

 

Everyone always does that will- in thought, belief, and behavior- BECAUSE it's their own will.

 

Therefore, we have free will, but NOT choice.

 

Everything is in "divine order" because all of life shares the Universal will.

[Astral Monk]

You seem to have over-looked Nietzsche.

Indeed. Totally skipped right past him. Too much of a populist for my liking, lol.

 

8)

[Astral Monk]

'Dependent origination'

 

Means everything--EVERYTHING--arises and falls together. The universe, timespace, intention, consciousness--they are all seamless facets of one single expression. One body, one being. We distinguish them at our convenience and peril.

 

Though your intestines operate by they own need not immediately directed by conscious will, they are not, in fact, separate beings. We cant blame them whem we get the crummies. Even if it is directly the result of their purposeful function..or misfunction. We should realize that looking at them in isolation as an independent organ is merely an artficial limitation to restrict the scope of our inquiry/domain of discourse. But while we can practically speak this way, the truth is they were never separate, but were always seamless part of the total body.

 

So it is with all things!!

 

8)

[Astral Monk]

From your perspective only the Big Bang was first cause" but yet something caused Singularity to "Bang".

 

Your association is not valid at the individual level.

 

I can refuse to turn the pond pumps back on after I have given them a short break and all the fish would die. I have life and death control over the fish in my ponds. And I have the free will to turn the pumps back on or just leave them off.

Only an uncaused cause has a necessary connection to unfolding events. Everything else is contingent. Meaning unless we find a First Cause, we can be confident that all events are contingent and mutually reinforcing. Causal connection is fully distributed in the universe. Where are the breaks?

 

To prove free will you need to prove you are the source of such an uncaused cause.

 

I suggest that if we take an honest and exhaustive analysis of our experience we will never discover such a cause. Instead we will continuously find ourselves fully emmersec in context after context with absolutely no breaks and no mystery how one moment moved to the next. All our decisions are couched in the fabric of our one single Being, seamlessly. We are not a patchwork of unexpected parts.

 

8)

[Astral Monk]

There is a 'soft' notion of free will that most people naturally confound with the idea of true ontological-causal liberty.

 

It is the Aristotelian idea. A will is free so long as it is not coersed, so long as the impetus of motion comes from within and not forced by externals.

 

No argument there.

 

Basically this is what youre saying marblehead. And its why we naturally create the concept of responsibilityto assign blame. That is a moral valuation, however, and does not touch on the true nature of reality, the metaphysical conditions of existence.

 

Thats for our convenience. But logic will undress this notion to its bare roots when we follow things to their natural ends. That is where 'real free will' vanishes into the thin air it came from.

 

Im not responsible for being born. But if hadnt been, nothing Ive done wouldve happened. All my choices arise from a choice made by others. And theirs from yet others, and so on. None of those choices appear in a vacuum or are uncontingent on what came before.

 

We are merely moments in an argument, never the sum total.

 

8)

 

 

You are suggesting here that man is nothing but a puppet being moved with strings that others are holding and totally incapable of original thought. I totally disagree with this.

 

Remember, not only do we have free will (within limits) but we can also make choice based upon our own original thought.

 

We remain responsible for all our thoughts, words and deeds because we have free will and the power to make choices based on original thought.

[Astral Monk]

Is yin 'free' to create yang?

 

No, the one naturally and necessarily arises from the other.

 

This law relation is the basis for all phenomena.

 

As in the Heart Sutra--emptyness is the same as form; form is the same as emptyness. There is seamless unity between all components of existence.

 

Where is the 'freedom' in law and necessity? How can we have such when the very basis of our world is a seamless causal connection?

 

If one is guilty, all are guilty. If one is innocent, all are innocent.

 

8)

[thursday]

Well, I won't put out any names or names of products of spiritual trojan horses on a public forum. Having been part of a "no free will" spirituality group, and the negative consequences for myself and others in my family.. Well, I can then speak from experience and recommend against such philosophies. What was also interesting was that the leader of that group came out years later in public and said it (no free will) was just a white lie he used to help people let go.

 

That is not to say that it's not interesting to think about or can have no value to a person at some point in their lives.. I just think that from experience, believing that I can change things, as irrational as that may seem to some! .. just personally helps me more than ("wanting to") believing otherwise ("because it's convenient"). So in my experience with mental illness, I suggest everyone to take more responsibility for their lives, myself included.

[Brian]

http://hansonlab.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Bell_test_Delft-PressRelease_vOct16.pdf

[Astral Monk]

Consider the sage tho--he is one with the dao, in perfect harmony, never disrupting the flow.

 

Uncaused causes clearly are disruptive. What sage would initiate them? How can one be in harmony then assert ones 'own will' above that harmony?

 

I think 'free will' (in the hard sense) is a search/dream of a power we dont possess and that only seems (in appearances) reasonable because we cant see the whole picture of our being. If we saw that clearly we'd see how silly the notion is in the end.

 

Also, I'm not saying metaphysical facts are necessarily the best basis for social policies either, lol.

 

8)

[Astral Monk]

Ok, last metaphor--reality is a book.

 

Each word exists in a specific linear sequence, seamlessly flowing one to the next with no interuptions. Each page is tied to every other page, and the whole works together as a single unit. It tells a complete story with a start, finish, and flow.

 

Consciousness can only perceive one word at a time, even though it vaguely recognizes the whole book exists as a single unit. If it were to pause between reading one word and the next it mind seem as though 'anything could happen' and there is no constraints. Even during the story flow it might not be able to predict the ending or even next word.

 

But that is the illusion of reading. The reality is that the story is conplete, finished, and there is no possibility of it being changed by any amount of reading it.

 

8)

Edited January 18, 2017 by Astral Monk

[roger]

Consider the sage tho--he is one with the dao, in perfect harmony, never disrupting the flow.

 

Uncaused causes clearly are disruptive. What sage would initiate them? How can one be in harmony then assert ones 'own will' above that harmony?

 

I think 'free will' (in the hard sense) is a search/dream of a power we dont possess and that only seems (in appearances) reasonable because we cant see the whole picture of our being. If we saw that clearly we'd see how silly the notion is in the end.

 

Also, I'm not saying metaphysical facts are necessarily the best basis for social policies either, lol.

 

8)

 

The "search/dream of a power that doesn't exist" is the attempt to alter truth, to change ultimate reality.

 

We can change our experience, but never absolute truth.

 

A person may think they want eternal hell to exist, so their enemies can go there. I've known of such people. Fortunately, their desire for others to spend eternity in agony won't make it so.

[Marblehead]

Have you?

 

Indeed I have.  And some of them were totally beyond logic.  Some ended in great disaster.  But some helped me move forward.  And I occasionally, but not too often, accept advice from others.

[Marblehead]

Only an uncaused cause has a necessary connection to unfolding events. Everything else is contingent. Meaning unless we find a First Cause, we can be confident that all events are contingent and mutually reinforcing. Causal connection is fully distributed in the universe. Where are the breaks?

 

To prove free will you need to prove you are the source of such an uncaused cause.

 

I suggest that if we take an honest and exhaustive analysis of our experience we will never discover such a cause. Instead we will continuously find ourselves fully emmersec in context after context with absolutely no breaks and no mystery how one moment moved to the next. All our decisions are couched in the fabric of our one single Being, seamlessly. We are not a patchwork of unexpected parts.

 

8)

 

I actually like your argument here even though I don't totally agree with it.

[Marblehead]

Im not responsible for being born. But if hadnt been, nothing Ive done wouldve happened. All my choices arise from a choice made by others. And theirs from yet others, and so on. None of those choices appear in a vacuum or are uncontingent on what came before.

 

Granted.  You mother and father had unprotected sex and you wiggled out of the mess.  Had your father made the choice to use protection you would not have been born.

[Marblehead]

If one is guilty, all are guilty. If one is innocent, all are innocent.

 

8)

Okay.  I concede.  All are guilty.

[Marblehead]

I think 'free will' (in the hard sense) is a search/dream of a power we dont possess and that only seems (in appearances) reasonable because we cant see the whole picture of our being. If we saw that clearly we'd see how silly the notion is in the end.

 

So if there is no free will and everything is cause and effect external to our self then why do anything at all?  I mean, cause and effect is going to make you do what others have caused so you might just as well sit on your ass and do nothing of your own choosing but be a puppet of others?

 

That sounds like wasted potential and basically a wasted life to me.

[Marblehead]

Ok, last metaphor--reality is a book.

 

Each word exists in a specific linear sequence, seamlessly flowing one to the next with no interuptions. Each page is tied to every other page, and the whole works together as a single unit. It tells a complete story with a start, finish, and flow.

 

Consciousness can only perceive one word at a time, even though it vaguely recognizes the whole book exists as a single unit. If it were to pause between reading one word and the next it mind seem as though 'anything could happen' and there is no constraints. Even during the story flow it might not be able to predict the ending or even next word.

 

But that is the illusion of reading. The reality is that the story is conplete, finished, and there is no possibility of it being changed by any amount of reading it.

 

8)

 

But all one has to do is cut the bindings and then each page is an entity of its self.  Oh, not a complete story, just a page in the passing of time.  But a special and unique page none-the-less. 

[Astral Monk]

But all one has to do is cut the bindings and then each page is an entity of its self.  Oh, not a complete story, just a page in the passing of time.  But a special and unique page none-the-less. 

 

There is no analog for 'cutting the bindings' in reality. Who could do such a thing? What would be the outcome? The collapse of all order and connection, utter irredeemable chaos? A book ripped to shred is no book at all. Even the sage who goes into the emptyness comes back into the flow of the story, and the book remains intact.

 

8)

[Astral Monk]

Okay.  I concede.  All are guilty.

 

[Astral Monk]

So if there is no free will and everything is cause and effect external to our self then why do anything at all?  I mean, cause and effect is going to make you do what others have caused so you might just as well sit on your ass and do nothing of your own choosing but be a puppet of others?

 

I would say that cause is not merely 'external'; or, the difference between 'internal' and 'external' is meaningless ontologically. We ARE causes and effects, inside and out. The key is to see how none of these causes--whether coersed from outside or initiated from inside--are separate, original, spontaneous events, but that all are seamlessly connected and can be traced back through themselves until the whole universe is involved. Wave upon wave upon wave.

 

The case would be different with true free will though. There would be breaks in the flow, interuptions in the wave, like a rock jutting out of the water, forcing a new wave pattern. And were we able to trace back the causes, we would come to a complete blank where the first cause jumps into existence and appears totally out of context to the rest of the flow of events.

 

I dont think we can ever see such a cause. And we have a good seat too, being at the center of will and intention. But even things like scratching the nose dont appear out of nowhere, but are embedded in a complete fabric of events. Tug on one thread and the whole rug comes off the wall.

 

8)