Know Thyself

Nothing in Excess
 
HomePortalFAQMemberlistSearchRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Determinism and Free-will.

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Determinism and Free-will. Thu Nov 21, 2013 4:20 pm

According to strict determinism, free-will is an illusion.

My questions are: What then is the role of consciousness ( The I Am-ness - The will ) if it doesn't have any control whatsoever over the organism? Why does neuronal activity trick " us " into feeling that we determine some of our actions? Why did nature evolve this sense of ' I Am-ness' if it is not dictating any actions at all?
Back to top Go down
apaosha
Daeva
avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 1513
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 30
Location : Ireland

PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will. Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:05 pm

The "I" is not subject to determinism, it is an expression of determinism.

The present is the ongoing manifestation of the past, therefore the "I" is the ongoing manifestation of past processes that brought it about.
You are not a spectator to causality, you are an effect of causality. To think that the "I" is a separate entity upon which determinism is applied is to fall into the error of language which presupposes an actor who performs an act: I think therefore I am.
The actor is the act, therefore the I is also the thought: thought therefore existence.

Any desires that a consciousness possesses do not spring from nothing. Consequently any choices can only be made through deterministic factors.

_________________
"I do not exhort you to work but to battle; I do not exhort you to peace but to victory. May your work be a battle; may your peace be a victory." -TSZ
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://knowthyself.forumotion.net
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will. Thu Nov 21, 2013 6:27 pm

Apaosha wrote: " The actor is the act, therefore the I is also the thought.."

Not sure I agree with that; I can still sense the " I Am-ness" without thoughts, i.e., via meditation. I think I know what you are saying, that is to say, " I think therefor I am " is redundant as " I think" already implies an "I" that exists.

So what is the function of the " I " from an evolutionary perspective?

Back to top Go down
apaosha
Daeva
avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 1513
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 30
Location : Ireland

PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will. Thu Nov 21, 2013 6:46 pm

The "I Am-ness" is thought, consciousness, awareness. One can think about prior thoughts or perception, which is the looking back, but the awareness itself is thought.

The "I" is a convention of language. The original latin is better: cogito ergo sum.

Otherwise you have the notion that a subject (I) can be disconnected from the action it performs (thought)..... further that the subject can be disconnected from the world in general such that it can be said to be subject to a tyrannical deterministic effect.

The past is everything. All that I am is a consequence of the past. Without the past I have no future. Without the past, there can be no future.

The notion of Free Will seems to me like a nihilist trying to excuse or escape the determining past that brought him about, to dismiss what limits him or restricts him, or reminds him of his failures or of his ultimate horizons.
Like a liberal who thinks an individuals nature can be corrected through proper training.

Designer people without pasts.

_________________
"I do not exhort you to work but to battle; I do not exhort you to peace but to victory. May your work be a battle; may your peace be a victory." -TSZ
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://knowthyself.forumotion.net
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will. Thu Nov 21, 2013 7:24 pm

apaosha wrote:
The "I Am-ness" is thought, consciousness, awareness. One can think about prior thoughts or perception, which is the looking back, but the awareness itself is thought.

The "I" is a convention of language. The original latin is better: cogito ergo sum.

Otherwise you have the notion that a subject (I) can be disconnected from the action it performs (thought)..... further that the subject can be disconnected from the world in general such that it can be said to be subject to a tyrannical deterministic effect.

The past is everything. All that I am is a consequence of the past. Without the past I have no future. Without the past, there can be no future.

The notion of Free Will seems to me like a nihilist trying to excuse or escape the determining past that brought him about, to dismiss what limits him or restricts him, or reminds him of his failures or of his ultimate horizons.
Like a liberal who thinks an individuals nature can be corrected through proper training.

Designer people without pasts.
I agree with you on awareness being the " I ". But the thoughts are not the " I"; they are distinct.

Could it likewise not be said that your mention of " The past is everything - without the past, I have no future" is a case of nihilistic-conservatism? Just like how the nihilistic-liberal constantly mentions the future, how the future utopia is everything.

And in regards to people's nature, I think it is a combination of nature (genes ) and nurture ( lifetime experiences ). If it was pure nature ( inherent ), then people would not be able to be brain-washed.
Back to top Go down
apaosha
Daeva
avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 1513
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 30
Location : Ireland

PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will. Thu Nov 21, 2013 7:50 pm

The "I" is thought, it is an analytical awareness which considers, conceptualizes and formulates.
As I said, you are assuming that there is a subject/predicate relationship, a preconception derived from language.

If you still think there is a distinction, then describe a thought without a thinker, or a thinker without a thought.

What is the I when it is not thinking, when it is not aware, when it is not conscious?

What is a consciousness when it is not conscious?

Quote :
Could it likewise not be said that your mention of " The past is everything - without the past, I have no future" is a case of nihilistic-conservatism?
It's a case of me being realistic.

There would be no "me" without the past. I am it's consequence and it's ongoing manifestation as it moves into the future, it's becoming.

I am not a conservative, who looks backward to past utopias, nor am I a liberal who looks forward to the hoped for coming utopia.

I am the past as it moves into the future.

_________________
"I do not exhort you to work but to battle; I do not exhort you to peace but to victory. May your work be a battle; may your peace be a victory." -TSZ
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://knowthyself.forumotion.net
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will. Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:25 pm

Apaosha wrote: " What is the I when it is not thinking? "




OM! Pure I Am-ness without thoughts.


The "I" can continue without thoughts.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 13998
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will. Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:47 pm

A plant is I=Am-ness ...a vegetable is.

In meditation one still thinks, and this is why one experiences it as a relief.
With meditation the mind shrinks it's perceptual-event-horizon, to it's most immediate form.

Consciousness is an self-organizing, self-ordering, pattern, part of existence, which perceives existence; self-consciousness is a part of consciousness perceiving itself perceiving.

A simple animal is purely conscious, I-Am-ness. It simply perceives, is conscious, and has no ability to perceive itself perceiving.
This is why when it sees its own reflection it cannot recognize itself. It only perceives otherness.
It's senses are outwardly focused.

Meditation is the cutting away of the mind from perception, to the point where it has no future, no past, and no self to perceive or to be perceived.
It is self-hypnosis.
It is a trance where only self-consciousness remains.
The senses are turned inward, towards the internal processes of the organism's aggregate energies.
The brain never stops functioning, no more than it does during sleep, but it tunes out of reality.
It is an extreme form of solipsism, where not even the imagining of the world is permitted.

The sensations are not brought into focus, but the brain never stops functioning.

A brain-dead man still lives, without having anything we would call lucid thoughts.
He lives as a plant would, as pure, sensation.

I, the self, the ego, does not require self-consciousnesses or a sophisticated form of consciousnesses to remain an emerging unity.

Self (ego) is a term referring to the totality of processes, the aggregate energies, participating in the self-ordering, self-organizing, self-maintaining, emergent unity we call an organism.
All these actions are what the self is.

No action, no self.
There is no "I" which just happens to act.
This is what Judeo-Christians, and the common type of modern nihilist believes.

Your action is not something you just happen to do ...it is you expressing your selfness.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will. Thu Nov 21, 2013 10:57 pm

i would distinguish 3 conceptions of the self: the actuality of experiential process, the identity-ego, and the Cartesian subject.

the first would be the "true" self, so to speak; one needn't formulate any conceptions for this self to be evident; it is the pre-conceptual presencing of one's consciousness, in whatever form.

the second requires memory in order to exist, as well as a discriminating intellect. first, the mind takes hold of experiences in spite of their passing in time as memories; then, the intellect discriminates and chooses more substantial experiences as reference points of individuation and distinction.

the third is a purely fictional abstraction born entirely out of onto-theological logic. the so-called non-experiential self in meditation is simply a very abstract, ineffable form of experiential being, a sort of non-sensual (if by sensual we mean the five senses) "force-feeling". in post-Platonic metaphysics, Process is deemed unreal in favor of the purported ontological supremacy of entities in stasis. instead of tracing the sense of self by means of careful phenomenological investigation (which would reveal that a sense of a unified self is the product of experiential continuity and memory), it is assumed that the "true" self is some sort of mysterious, formless entity that is separate from experience, a dark ghost behind the shifting shadows. it is the same logic that erroneously concludes that substance-essence (ousia) and form-essence (hypostasis) are separate things that are somehow prior to manifestation/presencing (aletheia). such errors are the result of the careless reification of the ordering processes of the intellect into distinct entities.

to so deem such concepts as inherent in themselves instead of necessarily emergent patterns of intellection is to downplay the utter importance of memory and individuated perception in the sculpting of higher levels of consciousness. moreover, it is the remembering of all change, form, temporality, distinction, and individuality, those aspects of reality decried by so many metaphysicians as "imperfect" or "evil", that are the very means by which metaphysics is even conceivable in the first place. to seek "salvation" from time and distinction is to wish death upon one's self.

there are no "things" underlying process; Being IS process.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 13998
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will. Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:25 am

Eulogy wrote:
i would distinguish 3 conceptions of the self: the actuality of experiential process, the identity-ego, and the Cartesian subject.

the first would be the "true" self, so to speak; one needn't formulate any conceptions for this self to be evident; it is the pre-conceptual presenting of one's consciousness, in whatever form.
Consciousness....animal sensuality.
No perception of self is required, because perception IS self.  

Eulogy wrote:
the second requires memory in order to exist, as well as a discriminating intellect. first, the mind takes hold of experiences in spite of their passing in time as memories; then, the intellect discriminates and chooses more substantial experiences as reference points of individuation and distinction.
I don't see a difference from the first here.
This sensual engagement results in the storage of data, experiences, which inform this sensual perception.

But I can see the beginning of a self-consciousnesses here.
Once the organism evolves the ability to recall, to remember, further and further back, there is a detachment of past from the immediate, creating this dualism of past self and presence.
When the mind begins to project into the future, this detachment can turn to a complete delusion, as the projected has no foundation in anything perceived or in the past (nature), and is a fabrication, or a fantastic recombination of elements that do not refer to anything sensual ...or, in the extreme, it becomes nihilism where the past (nature), and the present, are dismissed as illusions.
Nihilism, used properly, is this nullification of all which is perceived, experienced; all that is present, that appears, is apparent.
This is the start of a schizophrenic first stage of consciousnesses as it develops self-consciousness.
Jaynes described it as the Bicameral mind.

The gradual splintering of consciousnesses creates the illusion that one is other than one's form, one's presence, one's appearance. It also creates the possibility for the divine experience, God talking to us.
It also creates the possibility for narcissism; the schism distancing one part, the idealized, sanctified part, from the other, the base, the earthly, the mundane.        

Eulogy wrote:
the third is a purely fictional abstraction born entirely out of onto-theological logic. the so-called non-experiential self in meditation is simply a very abstract, ineffable form of experiential being, a sort of non-sensual (if by sensual we mean the five senses) "force-feeling". in post-Platonic metaphysics, Process is deemed unreal in favor of the purported ontological supremacy of entities in stasis. instead of tracing the sense of self by means of careful phenomenological investigation (which would reveal that a sense of a unified self is the product of experiential continuity and memory), it is assumed that the "true" self is some sort of mysterious, formless entity that is separate from experience, a dark ghost behind the shifting shadows. it is the same logic that erroneously concludes that substance-essence (ousia) and form-essence (hypostasis) are separate things that are somehow prior to manifestation/presencing (aletheia). such errors are the result of the careless reification of the ordering processes of the intellect into distinct entities.
Yes.
I've described how this comes about, in my view and in brief, above.

This schism of consciousnesses from self-consciousnesses becomes the noumenon/phenomenon, the mind/body, or the ideal/real, division.  
I consider this a primitive first stage of an evolving self-consciousnesses.
The mind is burdened with reconstituting unity, or to harmonize the divide creating a cohesion.  

Metaphysically speaking, it is this looking back, which is what consciousness is, which self-consciousness attempts to attach to the present ...to shrink the distance between noumenon and phenomenon - meditation tries to do this.

The most common practice is to increase the distance, to detach completely by pushing away the past, leaving the present, the immediate in a limbo. This limbo is disillusionment, and the only remedy for a mind finding itself in this situation is escapism in the most immediate: materialism hedonism.
The schism is not bridged, using art, but it is increased further creating a psychological confusion, a sense of loss of self, a lack of identity.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will. Mon Feb 06, 2017 12:37 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Determinism and Free-will.

Back to top Go down
 
Determinism and Free-will.
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Determinism and Free-will.
» Free Astrolgy Chart
» ISRAEL TO CONSIDER WORK-FREE SUNDAY
» Chris' Carb Free recipes
» OMG OMG OMG Sugar Free Ice Blocks

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Know Thyself :: AGORA-
Jump to: