I talked about my philosophy project to inquire about free will. So let's start.
What is freedom? My first impression of freedom is being tied up, then freed. You cut yourself loose from binding. You disallow others to restrict you. And this restriction is primarily around movement. Freedom is freedom to move. This extends to intellectualism, where there is a freedom to think. Politically in the west, united states, there is freedom to speak. We should be able to say any damn thing we please, yes? And this is freedom. If I want to tell somebody to shut the fuck up, or call a dumb twat a dumb twat, then I should have the freedom, yes?
The problem is "negativity". All that is "positive" is acceptable. Everything positive is already "free". Notice this observation. It's a big one, perhaps the biggest one. If somebody is always nice, always polite, always saying positive things, then isn't this person already "free"? Or........here is the difference. Or isn't it free only when you compare the positive with the negative???
You have infinite privilege to "be nice", polite, civil. What you do not have "freedom" is to become an animal, to let yourself loose and wild. You are not free to "let yourself go". You are not free to take the restraints off of your animal nature.
And this mostly, or completely, applies to males, not females. It is males who are disallowed to act on impulse and instinct, within society. Because males are combative, criminal, murderous, rapist, etc. Males will use physical force, our fortay, to acquire what we want. Civilization disallows this.
So what then is freedom and from which contexts? Freedom is different within society and outside.
Freedom in "nature", outside civilization, is physical freedom, freedom to move.
Freedom in civilization, is female privilege. Females are "free" to do whatever the fuck they want to. Males are disallowed and repressed from expressing male nature. The male sexual urge, libido, physical force, etc. is restricted.
So freedom depends on your environment. The first context is objective, "the wild", natural. Freedom of movement. You are free to move. Your body limits you. Freedom of society, you are only "free" to say positive things, help others, be polite, obey the status quo, and "respect women".
When the average manimal talks about freedom, what does (s)he mean? She presumes the context of civilization. As 99.5% of humanity, the manimals, live in global civilization. This is their context when they talk about "freedom". They presume freedom from within social norms and the status quos. They infer the metanarrative.
What they do not infer, is objectivity, reality, nature "outside" the city walls.
They do not consider physical freedom, freedom to move, to think, to act, to become.
True freedom is becoming.
Let this observation begin the philosophy project on free will.
I think I said one time in a old thread, " Civilization is woman's playground - The wild is man's playground ". In nature, woman is restricted; she doesn't have the institution or technologies to protect her. In civilization, man is restricted; the state is constantly watching him, making sure he doesn't express his animalistic side, his male nature. There are surrogate activities that allow males to vent, but they remain safe to the institution.
Civilization is a sort of prison to the more primal male, the barbarian.
I recommend this book, if you haven't already read it:
The wild is an "alpha" man's playground. Masculinity is not a birth right. The wild is no place for the weak. The weak are cast away and left to pick up scrapings where they can.
The wild is an "alpha" man's playground. Masculinity is not a birth right. The wild is no place for the weak. The weak are cast away and left to pick up scrapings where they can.
It's not just an alpha males playground; men formed gangs/tribes, worked together, hunted together, killed together, raped females together, and so on. Lone alpha-males, probably, weren't very common; power in numbers.
The book I recommended to Aeon explains this in detail.
The wild is an "alpha" man's playground. Masculinity is not a birth right. The wild is no place for the weak. The weak are cast away and left to pick up scrapings where they can.
It's not just an alpha males playground; men formed gangs/tribes, worked together, hunted together, killed together, raped females together, and so on. Lone alpha-males, probably, weren't very common; power in numbers.
The book I recommended to Aeon explains this in detail.
The wild is an "alpha" man's playground. Masculinity is not a birth right. The wild is no place for the weak. The weak are cast away and left to pick up scrapings where they can.
It's not just an alpha males playground; men formed gangs/tribes, worked together, hunted together, killed together, raped females together, and so on. Lone alpha-males, probably, weren't very common; power in numbers.
The book I recommended to Aeon explains this in detail.
A partnership, a... society?
I wouldn't call it a society; society/civilization get confused, mixed up in many minds. I would just call it a tribe.
I think I said one time in a old thread, " Civilization is woman's playground - The wild is man's playground ". In nature, woman is restricted; she doesn't have the institution or technologies to protect her. In civilization, man is restricted; the state is constantly watching him, making sure he doesn't express his animalistic side, his male nature. There are surrogate activities that allow males to vent, but they remain safe to the institution.
Civilization is a sort of prison to the more primal male, the barbarian.
I recommend this book, if you haven't already read it:
"Civilization definitely is an expression of the feminine with modern industrial civilization being the peak of femininity.
This is why modern civilization is overrun by women and feminized men.
Within the primal wilderness a place that is an expression of pure instinct do we find masculinity.
The more men turn away from the wilderness and nature the more we see them shed their masculinity for a more feminine existence.
A feminine existence that is controlled, domesticated, tamed, and conditioned all facets of existence or life."
Well stated. The wilderness, naturally, makes boys into men; you have to be tough, rugged in order to thrive. In the city, the opposite happens - boys are turned into girls, effeminate; they become sucked into materialism. Shopping for shoes, clothes, jewelry, and so on like females do. Luckily, I am close to the country/wilderness and am able to get away from the insanity/BS of urban life. I remember you told me that you are into bushcraft. It's a good way to get in touch with the inner, primal masculine aspect of ourselves.
I talked about my philosophy project to inquire about free will. So let's start.
What is freedom? My first impression of freedom is being tied up, then freed. You cut yourself loose from binding. You disallow others to restrict you. And this restriction is primarily around movement. Freedom is freedom to move. This extends to intellectualism, where there is a freedom to think. Politically in the west, united states, there is freedom to speak. We should be able to say any damn thing we please, yes? And this is freedom. If I want to tell somebody to shut the fuck up, or call a dumb twat a dumb twat, then I should have the freedom, yes?
The problem is "negativity". All that is "positive" is acceptable. Everything positive is already "free". Notice this observation. It's a big one, perhaps the biggest one. If somebody is always nice, always polite, always saying positive things, then isn't this person already "free"? Or........here is the difference. Or isn't it free only when you compare the positive with the negative???
You have infinite privilege to "be nice", polite, civil. What you do not have "freedom" is to become an animal, to let yourself loose and wild. You are not free to "let yourself go". You are not free to take the restraints off of your animal nature.
And this mostly, or completely, applies to males, not females. It is males who are disallowed to act on impulse and instinct, within society. Because males are combative, criminal, murderous, rapist, etc. Males will use physical force, our fortay, to acquire what we want. Civilization disallows this.
So what then is freedom and from which contexts? Freedom is different within society and outside.
Freedom in "nature", outside civilization, is physical freedom, freedom to move.
Freedom in civilization, is female privilege. Females are "free" to do whatever the fuck they want to. Males are disallowed and repressed from expressing male nature. The male sexual urge, libido, physical force, etc. is restricted.
So freedom depends on your environment. The first context is objective, "the wild", natural. Freedom of movement. You are free to move. Your body limits you. Freedom of society, you are only "free" to say positive things, help others, be polite, obey the status quo, and "respect women".
It is not that easy to find whether we are truly free or not.
Sometimes, it may look to us that we are free and acting according to our will, though that may not be true in real sense.
Think of a spring. It is free when loose and not tensed. But, if we strech it to some extent and keep it so for very long time, it will change its shape permanentlly.
Now, it would not return to its original shape even if we set it free.
The same happens to humans also. We all are dshaped to some extent, either for better or worse. But, we do not know what our real shape was.
Free will is a relative term, not an objective one. Most of that, what we think that we would do as free will, may not be our free will, but under the influence of our previous twisted mindset.
One can realize his free will only when he would able to unfold his subconscious mind also.
"Civilization definitely is an expression of the feminine with modern industrial civilization being the peak of femininity.
This is why modern civilization is overrun by women and feminized men.
Within the primal wilderness a place that is an expression of pure instinct do we find masculinity.
The more men turn away from the wilderness and nature the more we see them shed their masculinity for a more feminine existence.
A feminine existence that is controlled, domesticated, tamed, and conditioned all facets of existence or life."
Well stated. The wilderness, naturally, makes boys into men; you have to be tough, rugged in order to thrive. In the city, the opposite happens - boys are turned into girls, effeminate; they become sucked into materialism. Shopping for shoes, clothes, jewelry, and so on like females do. Luckily, I am close to the country/wilderness and am able to get away from the insanity/BS of urban life. I remember you told me that you are into bushcraft. It's a good way to get in touch with the inner, primal masculine aspect of ourselves.
In the era of modern civilization the wilderness is the last refuge or bastion of freedom and independence. It is the last sanctuary of freedom. The last refuge of masculinity.
Bushcraft and surviving off the land will become important once modern civilization fully destroys itself in that beyond the ruins of civilization the natural wilderness will become all that is left.
It is the will of "free will" that is relative. Because no two people, or organisms, are equal in will, or equal in power. There is always a difference of power, therefore a difference of will.
I've discussed this elsewhere. Does more willpower equal more freedom, or less? The more willpower I have, to change my environment to suit myself, or change myself to suit my environment, the more freedom I have?????? Yes or no
Does more power equal more freedom?
I tend to think not, no. More power equals less freedom. Because you become obligated to maintaining and sustaining your power. Power is an asset, therefore requires energy to maintain. The more power, the more energy required. The more energy required, the more difficult it is to secure the sources of energy.
For example, an empire grows too big and powerful. It can no longer maintain its size and power, what happens?
You could say that a powerful entity is "free"...............to do what?
Freedom, to do, always implies an end. A goal. An ideal. What happens if you have no goals? No goals equals no power? No goals equals no will? No goals equals no freedom?
Freedom is all about the individual trying to self actualize or manifest itself.
Freedom away from others since it is always others that try to control, restrict, and sap out your energies from self actualizing.
It's even more obvious when we accept that animals eat each other. Freedom from others, is also the survival instincts. We eat others and avoid becoming eaten. Freedom to live.
Ok. For the sake of argument, i accept your explanation.
But, the question is that how can one know what is true free will and what is his will of free will?
Can anyone know it without realizing oneself in its trueness? And, how it is even possible?
curious
Consciousness is the first step.
Most people across the globe are convinced as children, through state or religious indoctrination, that "we are born free". How many societies teach that we are born slaves? In the u.s. particularly, slavery is seen as abhorrent and hateful. So to claim that humans are born slaves, not free, runs against the typical western, liberal, humanist paradigm. It goes against the grain.
But one of the most insidious forms of social slavery, is to convince those who are slaves, that they are free.
"Choice is an illusion created between those with power and those without."
But one of the most insidious forms of social slavery, is to convince those who are slaves, that they are free.
That is what i am reffering to.
We are mostly what is taught to us or what we learn from surroundings. So, do we not have to lose all that before trying to understand true ourselves, and thus, free will (if there is any)?
But, if we lose all that, what will remain with us?
We are mostly what is taught to us or what we learn from surroundings. So, do we not have to lose all that before trying to understand true ourselves, and thus, free will (if there is any)?
But, if we lose all that, what will remain with us?
curious
Use doubt, the primary tool of philosophy. How were you first convinced that you were "born free", and by whom? Why do you still believe it today, if you do believe? Do you also believe your parents love you, yet, what is love? Why can't you define it, in your own words?
If you cannot define simple terms, words, ideas, and concepts, in your own words, then what does this reflect about your intelligence? You have been convinced of freedom....although you don't know what freedom is, convinced of love, without knowing what it means, convinced of god, without defining the concept any deeper than the most general, common, superficial levels?
Ask simple questions to simple minds, begin to find out, learn, discover.