Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Belief is comforting but is that worth what I really want?
Perhaps it would be better if we always lived our lives as if we only had a few days left. After all, you could be knocked down by a bus whilst crossing the road, have a completely unexpected heart attack, etc. Life is short when taken in the context of the universe - enjoy each moment now, there may not be another. 
Comments
Here?s my question... It appears to me that myth is comforting. So, is ignorance bliss overall? For example, if you had just a few days, months, or years to live, would you prefer the doctor to keep you in ignorance with the illusion that you were going to be fine? Or would it be preferable, overall, to see things as they are, and adapt or adjust as best you could. MMmmm?
-d
It is not that we "should do nothing", or "should live life as if it is fleeting". Life is fleeting and we do nothing, despite how long we feel life is, or what we think we do. Even knowing this is so doesn't change experiencing the ebb and flow of our primate biology. If I've got an itch, I'll scratch it.
Now, I'm just calling 'em as I see 'em, which often rubs folks the wrong way, so please don't take what I say personally. If I had free will, I'd change and become a bit more diplomatic... alas...
Yes we are animals - we have physical needs that need to be met, but that is not all we are and whilst we must guard against our human tendency to over-intellectualise things, we must still be true to our nature.
What I found most intriging in this discussion so far was:
This is interesting . . . "we must still be true to our nature." What IS our true nature? Personally I would say that part of our "true nature" is to always be thinking ahead -- where will I get my next meal, what will I do next, etc. -- which suited us very well in the "wild." But this doesn't include focusing on the moment. I'm guessing that isn't quite what you mean by "true nature" . . . or is it? Set me straight.
By the way, Luke Abbott! I couldn't help but notice that you are the Site Admin. Woo! That must be an honor. Hey everyone! Luke's the Site Admin! nightcaps and hat's off to Luke Abbott! *clapclapclapclapclapclap!*
As for what our true nature is, I believe our true nature just IS.
Is that deep or just a cop out?
"But that is not all we are," to me that means our "true nature" extends beyond our "animal nature." Personally, I would tend to disagree, but I want to understand exactly what this "true nature" is, and how it's different from other animals . . .
I'd make sure that my kids' last memories of me are all happy ones, and thats it.
I toss out 'true nature', 'animal nature' as concepts to ponder. Question is mystery. Answer spoils the deepest sense of mystery. I focus on us as 'animals' first and foremost to simplify the issue. 'Animal' is as deep a mystery as any other concept. I think we tend to get ahead of ourselves... thanks to our big brain. [chref=40]Turning back[/chref] to a simpler view is helpful.
Nothing worthwhile is easy, but it's hard, man! I find myself avoiding these 'deeper' sections of this forum, hanging out in the Tao louge, cracking wise and chit chatting, when i know i need to be reading the articles here-and i am-but my efforts just never seem to be enough-I want ansers and revelations NOW, but by wanting answers, i'm avoiding answers, missing the real questions, which have never been asked anyway...
-my own worst critic, though many are in line for that job...
So when I feel that way, I remember KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid!) and just breathe in and out and put one foot in front of another. In the present moment I have yet to experience fear.
PS I only know how to do this by practicing meditation, which is merely staying present. I highly recommend it.
One thing that struck me about the messages concerning the 'trading spouses' show was the amount of jealousy directed towards Carl for 'not working' for having time to do yoga, meditate spend time with his kids. "He's home all day, doesnt work 9-5, he cant be a good father, he must have a hidden agenda", etc...
These people who reacted so negatively towards his ability to both have and use free time well really showed their hand. It was very revealing. People dont use their time wisely, they're rushing towards the grave, and they want to drag others with them.
I work graveyards, and when i'm bumming around during the day doing my business, I often get looks or comments that seem envious and even angry, like I'm not pulling my share of the world's weight. And when i suggest to friends that they stop and meditate, or try barefooting or other stress relieving techniques, they look at me as if I'm insane. "I dont have time", "thats not acceptable in my position" etc...really a shame. Fighting against the way, if you will...
There is no 'free' time, it's all bought and paid for, might as well use it to our advantage.
I have a lazy mind, so I just do it and trust everything will fall into place.
I apologise for my typographical error - I meant a tablet not a table! Please do not fear for my cat's life; she will turn 13 soon and is a very contented being (and also healthy!).
"we are all animals but that is not all we are". Through a fluke of evolution, human beings developed in a different way to most other primates. There are, of course, the obvious physical differences, but as well as these there are the mental differences (I hasten to add that this does not mean that humans are better than other animals, merely different).
Yes, we have a biological nature that constrains us to a certain extent - take as an example the choice to become a vegetarian: human beings have evolved to be omnivorous (i.e. we eat everything and yes, even each other) and yet some people choose not to eat meat - we overcome our biological nature through the exercise of our free will.
But our biological nature is not all we are, as my example above shows. I talked earlier of being true to our nature and living life as it comes, and some people replied well what about curiousity, isn't that true to our nature? Yes it is, but (and it's a big but) we should not indulge one part of our nature to the exclusion of all the others, which is what we do when we forever look ahead to the future and ignore the here and now. Being true to our nature is to be true to all of it not just parts.
So what is our true nature, I hear you cry, that was the explanation I asked for in the first place woman! So here goes, my poor contribution to the discussion.
Human beings are part of the animal kingdom, we would be fools to ignore this fact, but through our evolutionary process we developed an ability to wonder and question, worry and plan and this is also true to our nature. The trick is, in my lowly and tentative opinion, to keep these in balance because only then can we know our true nature. It is neither one nor the other rather a combination of both, balanced and in harmony. Unfortunately, in my (almost) forty years of life, I have come to the regrettful conclusion that very few people know what balance is, let alone want to achieve it! Perhaps this is the fault of our western consumer driven society, I don't know.
I look forward to any posts on this reply.
Civilization is an destabilizing influence for humanity in particular and nature in general. It is a double edged sword, we get an inordinate amount of security and comfort, compared to wild animals. We pay for that with an inordinate sense of disconnection with nature which results in imbalance. Nature is pay as you go. You could even say we are 'addicted' to comfort and security and so are simply suffering the consequences of our addiction.
Oh, by the way, welcome back :!:
It is so much easier to bemoan our fate and say that we have no choice! You could perhaps extend this argument further and say that even through refusing to choose we have in fact chosen and therefore exercised our free will.
Thanks for the welcome back :P
OK Little Dragon, you asked for it...
It is not that I don't accept it. In fact, I believed whole heartedly that I had free will up until about 20 years ago when, while pondering the issue, doubt entered my mind. Try as I might, I could find no real evidence for it. Every so called example of free will that I could think of could be explained by the simple process of 'balancing desires'. This, the strongest need wins principle, appears to be at work, not only for us, but all life on earth.
Furthermore, I've asked many folks who believe in free will to give me an example of it at work. All examples so far can be easily explained by the simple observation that we end up doing, or refraining from doing, whatever we most need to do, or most need not to do.
Just to be clear about what I understand need to be... it is that driving emotional force, a thirst, we feel awaken within us. For example, we don't spontaneously say to ourselves, "I think I'll light a fire of need for eating food, watching TV, reading a book,..." (ad infinitum). What actually happens is that we feel the need/s ignite within. The type of need we feel at any moment is determined by our deep personal physical and emotional nature, our paradigm, and our surroundings. This foundational need operates in concert with, and is part and parcel of, our innate interests and talents. We don't choose them either, by the way; they arise from the same roots as need. Our 'free will' struggle comes into play when a need/s arises which is in conflict with another need/s (which we don't 'choose' to feel either). This sets up a state of emotional anxiety as the conflicting needs struggle to 'win'.
Let's say, for example: I'm fat; I love good food; I want to be thin to attract a mate; I'm a great cook. Each of these is either a need, or a conflicting need I feel. What role does free will play here? If I eat less, loose weight and become thin you'll say I exercised my free will, right? But that invokes a 'force' which can be explained by a much simpler observation. Not only simpler, but an observation that can be applied to all animals.
Here goes: I started eating less because the need to attract a mate was stronger than my need to eat good food. That I could eat less despite the fact that I'm a great cook is further proof of just how strongly I needed to attract a mate. This reasoning can be applied to any and all examples of human behavior, as well as animal behavior. This may explain why we believe in free will. Even an implied sense of free will allows us to feel superior to those other 'lower' animals. Interestingly, I run across people who at this point don't want to discuss it any further. They get uncomfortable because, I assume, they treasure their belief in free will, but can not 'prove it'. Either that or it's my garlic breath.
I invite you to give me a real world example of free will. Like I said, I'm still waiting. If I see some evidence for it, I'll be the first to climb back on board. Until then I grow increasingly skeptical for although many claim it exists no one offers proof.
Now why am I harping on this issue of free will? It has to do with Buddha's view that we need to understand what is actually going on before we have any hope of mediating it. If free will is just wishful thinking, then our whole culture is founded on wishful thinking. That has to result in some intractable problems. One age old problem that arise from the belief in free will is that it fuels self certainty. The sense of a superior self allows us to rationalize the judgements we make about other people which allows us to get away with murder (literally and figuratively) and still maintain our sense of innocence. Free will provides the foundation for morality and all its attendant hypocrisy. When I think about it, the belief in free will is like a belief in God. In the West, both beliefs go hand in hand, i.e., free will is our way to avoid the 'devil' and live a righteous life. In the East free will is more of an implied belief, i.e., you can fiddle with your karma, or you can choose to be mindful. In truth, you are mindful only when you feel the need. How you come to feel the need to be mindful is part of life's mysterious way.
Whew, them's a lot a words... sorry. If I had free will, I probably would not have written quite so much.
Having read your reply to mine there are just a couple of things to say. Firstly, I'm sure that I will never convince you that free will exists - but please don't tell me it's because I don't look at things clearly - I do, although my clear vision differs from yours. Secondly, there are a number of examples that I could have used, but reading what you have written, I doubt whether they'd convince you either!
I think that, fundamentally, our disagreement about free will is an extension in our (glorious and welcome) personal differences. What springs to mind for me is the allegory of the 3 vinegar tasters - Buddha had a sour look on his face, Lao Tzu was smiling.
Simply said, would you agree that it all boils down to the fact that what we see is the mirror reflection of what we 'don't want' to see?
Specifically, maybe you 'don't want' to see that free will is an illusion... or maybe... I don't want to see that free will is real. So, we see the world that we each want to see.
There is no proof, either way, so instead, let's look at the impact our respective views have on our life. As I used to believe in free will and now no longer do, I have some experience in both paradigms. Thus, I have noticed that...
1) Absent free will, judging others become almost impossible, as does casting stones at other's 'bad choices'. Self forgiveness comes easily, and with self forgiveness naturally flows the forgiveness of others, as does settling, like water, into the 'lower position'.
2) Present free will, judging my own or another's 'poor choices' in life becomes unavoidable, as does the contention which inevitably ensues.
For the rest of it, nothing changes. In either case, (1) or (2), we continue doing what we need to do (or not do) and ignore what whatever we don't need to do (or not do).
Well, so much for being brief...
And for those who embrace Free Will--do you have a choice in it? Can one truly choose to reject the concept of Free Will? And I'm also open to the idea that Free Will exists temporarily, in our most lucid moments, then vanishes like the proverbial Yeti.
Now, this is an easy one!
I don't see any evidence that we choose either to believe or not to believe. I suppose in the final analysis, all belief is based on faith, not proof as such. I faithfully believed in choice for 40 some years until I actually looked for some small shred of evidence that it was real and not just a projection of what I wanted to have. I ain't found any evidence yet, nor has anyone offered me any. :shock:
I suspect that we all need to believe in free will to make civilization work. One criteria of being civilized is not being like the other animals, i.e., instinct driven without free will. Having free will is the cornerstone myth of the human paradigm. It allows us to 'lay trips' on one another and ourselves which is the engine that keeps us interacting together in the massive cultures which have evolved, especially since the agricultural revolution (10,000BCE).
What say you?
Belief, in general, tends to be an insidious concept, leading quite often to a sort of "hardening of the mental arteries," and I tend to have suspicions and hunches rather than any kind of firm beliefs. My hunch is that Free Will can sometimes be a useful concept, yet mostly it's a sneaky way of guilting people into doing the "right" thing, where really, from a Taoistic point of view, people would do the right thing naturally if only the moralists and Free Willers (ha!) would leave them alone.
There's an interesting take on Free Will in a story by Raymond Smullyan, my favorite logician/mathematician/musician/magician/Taoist philosopher, which you can find here: http://www.mit.edu/people/dpolicar/writing/prose/text/godTaoist.html
It's a bit long, but I think you will enjoy it.
Ah, nothing like a bit of philosophy to start the day!