Yawn…
…zzzzz.
It’s like you have no free will. Surprise! You don’t, except within certain parameters, i.e., compatibilist free will. So you are in a box. That is how our world is . We are in the box of our body that is within the box of our house that is within the box of our Earth that is within the box of our galaxy, etc., etc. Without structure there wouldn’t be us. Always there are parameters that define us. Live with it.
My memory fades as I get older, but I think the two of you remember some of those free will discussions we had on this forum, before the reboot last year. Conversations like that are one of the reasons I tend to avoid raising the issue. It’s a great topic, don’t get me wrong, but if someone is emotionally attached to their opinion, it can get ugly pretty fast. I try to keep in mind that the current theory is that free will is some kind of an illusion, and that illusion makes it difficult for us to think about what it is, since we are in the illusion. You can’t put it in a test tube in a lab and study it. We are the lab. Whoa, I just blew my own mind there.
Anyway, I’ve noticed it can make people depressed or angry. And I seem to remember some data that says it can make people act irrationally, since they take it to mean nothing matters. Which leads us back to you know who.
Yawn……zzzzz.
I have already established that you don’t know the answer to my questions since all you can do is what I’m trying to avoid, which is dismiss without proving it otherwise. Your example of the impossible falls flat since that would imply something I don’t have which is total certainty.
And Tim, the issue isn’t free will. It’s rather that what I think of as “me” isn’t me but just parts from everything around me. Like how if I was raised somewhere else I would be a different person. There isn’t a me I can call me, just parts from around you (aka conditional). Their claim is that this isn’t you, that it’s false. I don’t know how to argue against it. On the one had the idea is nice since it means there are no evil people just circumstances that leads them to it. On the other it means that I don’t really have a reliable guide to navigate the world or anything I can call me.
It doesn’t really have to do with free will.
As I have said before, the “I” that you perceive is perceived by virtue of your complex verbal behavior. The “I” that you are is certainly determined by your biological heritage and the conditions of your environment since conception. If your environment and/or biological heritage were different, you would be a different “I”. But you are what you are. If someone wants you to question that the “I” that you perceive is illusory or erroneous, I suppose that is a possibility. But even so, it would not be very functional, for very long, to have no sense of “I”. One thing I agree with is that we are all determined by our conditions. So you are a decent person, but had your life gone differently, you might have become a vile disgusting criminal. But things did not go differently, so you are who you are.
I guess that makes sense.
Though their claim of “you are the universe” leaves me at a loss and I don’t think it has to do with atoms.
AFAIK, each of us is just one relatively infinitesimal part of the universe in one relatively infinitesimal part of the space-time continuum.
But as Galadriel said to Frodo, “Even the smallest person can change the course of the future.”
I don’t think that is what is meant by that.
Your search for meaning can only be accomplished by you. But that also may be neither here nor there.
Re: an infinitesimal component of the universe being the totality of the universe, it seems like nonsense to me. And it’s too late to ask Stephen Hawkins.
Well I think they meant it literally.
But I guess what I fear is living a lie. Hence Buddhism talking about being truly who you really are.
Not sure if that’s true
I’m kinda stepping away from this conversation, but I have Patheos on my facebook feed, and this popped up. Had to share it. It’s an essay from Alan Watts in his later years. He lays out how you could fake being a guru if you wanted to. There certainly are many of them out there, maybe some of them got the idea from this essay, but it’s not hard to figure it out for yourself. Here’s an excerpt that fits in with this thread (my bold and underlines):
On the one hand, you yourself must be utterly free from any form of religious or parapsychological superstition, lest some other trickster should outplay you. On the other hand, you must eventually come to believe in your own hoax, because this will give you ten times more nerve. This can be done through religionizing total skepticism to the point of basic incredulity about everything – even science. After all, this is in line with the Hindu-Buddhist position that the whole universe is an illusion, and you need not worry about whether the Absolute is real or unreal, eternal or non-eternal, because every idea of it that you could form would, in comparison with living it up in the present, be horribly boring.
What does that have to do with my current problem about the broward people and the self?
Also didn’t Watts bring up the “there are no objects in the real world”.
You don’t see it because you are the one who has religionized total skepticism. Your god requires that you don’t see it. Your ritual is to reject it. You believe your own hoax and that has given you the nerve to come to an international skeptics forum and ply your trade. If you haven’t done that, if you are still faking it, there is no way for us to tell. We can’t tell if you are a willing convert to Broward, or sales person for them, or just someone who won’t listen to reason.
You don’t see it because you are the one who has religionized total skepticism. Your god requires that you don’t see it. Your ritual is to reject it. You believe your own hoax and that has given you the nerve to come to an international skeptics forum and ply your trade. If you haven’t done that, if you are still faking it, there is no way for us to tell. We can’t tell if you are a willing convert to Broward, or sales person for them, or just someone who won’t listen to reason.I haven't heard reason or an argument against what they argue.
That “you are the universe” to me I see it as atoms. That everything is made of the same stuff, and that the “self” is just something only in our heads to help us survive. I mean I haven’t heard anything against it. I mean sometimes I imagine what it feels like and it’s interesting, but that’s not proof. You cite Watts but he says the same thing.
I just want to know how people can reject this because I would love to know.
I mean there was a brief article in a Buddhist magazine I read about how Black Americans should take the pain that has shaped their “great compassion” and relate to it in a way that frees them to be truly who they are. Whatever that means.
We probably shouldn’t be giving advice to black Americans. That’s got to be tricky even for other black Americans.
I guess. I just get triggered when it comes to “being who you truly are” since I fear living a lie. Even though it’s little more than a day so, I can’t shake that “who you truly are” is absent any sort of influence (even though now I see that is just a hypothetical).
But Lausten is wrong. I don’t religionize total skepticism (I already had a big problem with that earlier in life and it was rough to get over). It’s more like I don’t have an answer to what they are arguing and the fact that their beliefs and claims seem to have an impact on them makes me think that it is true in some manner.
I know what you mean about something being hard to shake.
The writer of Ecclesiastes bewails the meaninglessness of worldly pursuits apart from God. When we are spiritually dead, life is ultimately empty. Nothing in this world will fully satisfy the deepest longings of our hearts (see Psalm 73:25). But, in Jesus, we have purpose.
Amen, brother. Let us fill the deepest longings of our hearts with some sweet sweet fiction. And now I will do the textual version of speaking in tongues (aka speaking in texts): Shimaop llaiaka aoriandu kalackensha busriaga layesvaranshalla!! In Buddha’s name!