what is the answer? has it been refuted or what? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche_and_free_will

File: 600 KB, 1869x1263, my_free_will_question1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 11:40:57 2022 No.19896133 [Reply] [Original]

what is the answer? has it been refuted or what?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche_and_free_will

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 11:42:30 2022 No.19896141 File: 75 KB, 643x820, 6B03F691-75CC-444D-8E3C-764BBDF25AD3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>19896133

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 11:43:33 2022 No.19896147 >>19896141 STOP POSTING IT

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 12:14:37 2022 No.19896302

>>19896133
>so all that can be said is that [the will] exists and that its decisions are dependent on... its decisions... this is a tautology
Of course it's a tautology, you're basically asking yourself 'what decisions will I make in the future?' Any answer to that question necessarily has to violate causality, so the question itself cannot be formatted as a logical proposition without resulting in a fallacy.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 12:18:07 2022 No.19896320 I refute it thus

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 12:49:09 2022 No.19896461 >>19896302 so I am right in saying free will is a nonsense concept?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 12:53:00 2022 No.19896478 >>19896461 Maybe.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 12:53:49 2022 No.19896486 >>19896478 why maybe?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 12:54:04 2022 No.19896487 >>19896133 Posts like these are why Wittgenstein maintained that philosophy is the very poison to which seeks to cure. You loop all the way around and gained… nothing.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 12:55:35 2022 No.19896495 >>19896487 i didn't start it, they say free will exists and I'm asking for clarity

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 12:59:00 2022 No.19896507

>>19896495
There is no clarity, you did well in bringing the left hemisphere to it’s logical conclusion, which is the bridge to the right hemisphere, just “being”, beyond concept.

I will say that your implication of one’s ability to change ones character being proportional to the guilt one feels after committing a shameful action was insightful, and I made sure to write it down on my notepad (steal it).

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:02:16 2022 No.19896518

>>19896495
Also, it doesn’t matter, because whether or not we judge people as rational, free agents or not has nothing to do with rationality or agency, nor does it lie in our control to change that. It’s a meaningful path to a literally meaningless conclusion, like all philosophy. I’ve always felt that philosophy is about building pathways in the brain, approaches and lines of thought, rather than clusters, conclusions and rationalizations.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:04:23 2022 No.19896536

>>19896486
Because I'm still evaluating the strength of Nietsneed's argument. Like I said before, saying that the decisions of the will depend on the decisions of the will results in a tautology because it's an impossible question to answer. I'm also thinking that saying that the will depends on the decisions of the will is actually conflating will and thoughts. As a man, you can observe a phenomenon and entertain the idea of taking multiple courses of action in response to this phenomenon. Is the will what decides the action out of many possible ones you take in response to this phenomenon? Or is the will what sees the action through after you decide to take it?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:07:10 2022 No.19896554

Hi. I'm uneducated on any of these common philosophies so grab yourself a big heaping bowl of salt while you read my post.

People are the product of their experiences. They make decisions based on
1. Their brain function at the time of birth and
2. Their experiences which affect how they think.
Preferences, willpower, all states of mind are determined by how they interacted with the world previously. You can say there is no free will because everyone affects eachother, or you can say that is precisely what free will is, because while you are shaped you also shape and can resist change (like for example someone in an argument refusing evidence).
Either way, I think it boils down to how you feel about freedom, and if you feel free in spite of how you've been raised.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:09:07 2022 No.19896564 >>19896554 In practical terms it comes down to simply taking responsibility for your wellbeing as a man, or hiding behind hollow verbiage because, like, nothing even matters dude.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:10:40 2022 No.19896568

>>19896536
I'm concerned with whatever is the deciding agent, the decision is what I'm trying to focus on. Sorry if that was unclear. Again, as far as I can tell, a decision is made...but to freely will this decision....what does this mean? To...select it from all possible decisions(again this tautology we went over, obviously). perhaps reread some of what I said with this in mind? I'm an undergrad so this is likely not as well stated as it should be

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:11:42 2022 No.19896574 >>19896554 >>19896564 you are right in a practical sense but this is probably the farthest thing from a practical conversation ;)

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:14:10 2022 No.19896584

>>19896568
>Again, as far as I can tell, a decision is made...but to freely will this decision....what does this mean?
I don't know the answer. This is the question your posts are making me think about. I may eventually come to a conclusion, I may not. What I have posted so far are potential arguments against Nietzsche's conclusion that free will does not exist that I have managed to think of over the past hour.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:16:54 2022 No.19896604 >>19896584 ok. thank you. I will monitor the thread and let everyone know if I think of something else

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:18:19 2022 No.19896617 "free will" in a colloquial sense can still exist in deterministic universe

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:19:53 2022 No.19896622 >>19896617 in what sense?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:27:52 2022 No.19896653

>>19896622
to give a simple exemple, if you are forcing somebody at gun point to do something, they aren't doing it out of their free wil like they would if they were doing it on their own, even if both of those situations were determined by prior causes

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:33:23 2022 No.19896674

>>19896653
ok, that's true but not really what I'm interested in. I'm concerned with the validity of the concept of the free will with respect to how it would justify true metaphysical condemnation, a true offense against God Himself, if it were indeed true. Pre-determination would nullify this condemnation. I don't doubt that man is as he is, but rather whether he is a self cause in the metaphysical sense which free will seems to imply. And if man is a self-cause, what is the nature and origin of this? If man in this sense is like God, boundless without beginning or end, from whence would come specific decisions if he were truly boundless and indifferent?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 13:35:35 2022 No.19896683

>>19896674
and to clarify a little, if our god-man encompassed the totality of possible decisions, why a consciousness of our specific, individual lives and singular decisions within a linear time frame as opposed to a singular consciousness of the whole?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 14:18:51 2022 No.19896881

>>19896674
If there is a table in front of you and you are hungry, and it is lined with plates containing fruits: banana, strawberry, apple, pear, blueberries, raspberries, orange, grapefruit, grapes, mango, cherries, pineapple, plum, kiwi, pomegranate, watermelon, cantaloupe etc... What do you do?

Also have you ever thought you disliked something, and then discovered you liked it? Have you ever liked something but not wanted it everyday?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 14:24:59 2022 No.19896908 maybe I'm just an hylic bugmen or whatever, but I can't wrap my head around something being neither determined or random

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 14:30:26 2022 No.19896936 >>19896881 Sure?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 14:41:29 2022 No.19896969 >>19896908 this

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 14:52:18 2022 No.19897018 Now that you are talking about Nietzsche, I wonder, does an ubermensch follow the rules of other men? For example, does an ubermensch allows the law to punish his wrong doer, or does he take justice in his own hands (vengeance) as he see fits?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 14:56:52 2022 No.19897047

>>19896936
If there is a table in front of you and you are hungry, and it is lined with plates containing fruits: banana, strawberry, apple, pear, blueberries, raspberries, orange, grapefruit, grapes, mango, cherries, pineapple, plum, kiwi, pomegranate, watermelon, cantaloupe etc... What do you do?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 14:57:27 2022 No.19897048 >>19897047 I haven't the foggiest

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 15:00:58 2022 No.19897060 >>19896133 He’s right. He was also in a way right about eternal recurrence. If time exists within any outer dimension, it is a static thing and the experiences you have along the way are an infinite number of eternal states.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 15:13:19 2022 No.19897107

>>19896133
Can you choose to stop breathing? Can you levitate? Shoot lasers out of your eyes? "Free will" obviously doesn't exist, the same way free speech doesn't exist. We have "protected" speech which tends to feel free, so will may be in a similar category.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 15:23:32 2022 No.19897153 >>19897107 people will still claim some degree of free agency within the bounds of what is possible

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 15:26:04 2022 No.19897165

>>19896133
If you're surrounded by an invisible sea of ignorance pressing all around you without you knowing it your free will not only extremely limited, but you're not even aware of this predicament. Relative to other humans an individual may be said to have free will,but even then it is a matter of luck. When do situational or innate limitations become genuine impairments and thereby obstacles not only to the exercise of a particular individual's will, but to the very capacity or degree which they may be said to hold it, vs another's capacity for the same? Certainly not all men are created equal, by which it stands to reason that they do not enjoy an equal measure of free as a matter of intrinsic ability, and without counting their external or situational ability to exercise it. Certainly man, as a species, has more free will than other sentient species, but within the confines of the human species how, if it all, can free will be objectively measured. And if it can be so measured how can one justify punishing those for their instrinsic deficits in a matter about which they have almost certainly never been formally taught? If you have never been formally taught in the thought and exercise of free will how can you be blamed, punished, and confined for its incorrect exercise, or lack thereof, for to do so is not so dissimilar from blaming, punishing, and imprisoning a man for never having been taught writing, or the correct use of certain physical implements, etc, while an entirely different sort of man (precisely of that class dedicated to the mastery of free will) is virtual immune to what are to him such basic traps and pitfalls precisely because he was taught mastery of the portion of human ability known as free will. Should not the state correct for this imbalance or be judged utterly and hypocritical perverse in its treatment of the former type of man?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 15:37:46 2022 No.19897209

>>19897153
We know enough neuroscience to know that the brain is constantly doing different tricks to keep a certain pace of information flow. If things were instantaneous, the brain would not even be able to process anything. How can you say you have free will when hormones are produced by different smells and sounds and images, and then a feeling comes, and THEN a rationalization of that? How can you say you have free will when you look at a landscape and do not know of every branch and leaf on every tree in the landscape? The brain picks and chooses FOR you. How can you say there is free will when there is roughly a 15 second delay between the current image in front of you and the image you are processing in your mind?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 15:42:00 2022 No.19897230

Choice is a joke. The humans are constantly operating within the framework of a game, where they are gaslighted into believing they have a limited set of options for any given situation, it's always either this or that. A human is constantly selecting from a very small pool of options, but these are not the only options at all. The game doesn't even really exist. They have an impossible to know amount of options constantly available from which they can make their choices, but they always have it in real time reduced to 2 or 3 potential options and they are absolutely convinced they must pick one of those.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 15:55:51 2022 No.19897305 >>19897209 Exactly.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 15:58:15 2022 No.19897317 >>19897209 people would object to your claims regarding the mind on epistemological grounds

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 16:20:03 2022 No.19897431 >>19897209 Because free will does not mean complete control, it means not entirely out of your control, a distinction some here are failing to make.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 16:29:36 2022 No.19897493 >>19897431 See >>19897107 >>19897317 They would be retarded to do so. What is the angle here?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 16:37:37 2022 No.19897548 >>19897493 people would say our involuntary adherence to many aspects of reality does not necessarily mean all aspects of our being are entirely involuntary

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 16:44:52 2022 No.19897599

>>19897548
>>19897493
>>19897431
I am aware there are many things I can do right now with my mind and body; what is the ultimate force that will decide what I do right now?

I can raise my right arm, I can raise my left arm, I can raise both at the same time, I can while standing on right foot, standing on left, while jumping, while kicking, while screaming, while whispering, while singing, a nice song, an ugly song, while turning to the left, while turning to the right, quickly or slowly, orbith one after the other, while moving my head up and down, or side to side, or front and back, or all 3, quickly, or slowly, or quickerly or slowerly, or quicker or slower then that, or a series of them in 1 2 3 order, or 321 order, or 2 3 1 order, or 2 2 3 order, or 2222113 order, etc.

I am aware right now that I am able to perform any of these actions; what will ultimately force me to choose which to perform?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 17:00:27 2022 No.19897688 >>19897599 you tell me

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 17:04:21 2022 No.19897715

>>19897548
Let them be wrong. Some folks lose a lot when they find out its all fake. You were given a foundation by birth and being raised. Each day is a new day with days behind it. To live life at all is to react. The credit goes to the masses, not you.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 17:05:23 2022 No.19897721 >>19897599 The compoundment of all of your experiences, perhaps going all the way back to the big bang.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 17:12:32 2022 No.19897760 >>19896133 Why did he take so long to explain causality. Or am I retarded

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 17:14:21 2022 No.19897774

>>19897721
>>19897688
The answer is Nothing.

I am a certain complex something: I am aware of many multitudes of options;

Nothing is forcing me to choose any of those actions to perform.

They are arbitrary and meaningless actions, choosing on over another will result in nothing of importance or meaning.

But I am aware there exists these possibilities, these degrees of freedom.

It makes no difference whether I choose the one or the other or the other.

I am aware right now I can choose any or all or none.

The intense burden of the immense power of my freedoms entirely in my control, as to which I choose.

I am say I will pick the first series of movements just as easily as I can pick the 2nd or 3rd or 4th and/or 5th and/or 6th.

I, me, that which is aware, that which sees and stores information and options in my head, is aware of a multitude of options, and that I, the seer of these options, am aware that it is entirely up to me, to choose which option I wish to perform, or to not choose, or to choose them all.

I am even aware I have options as to my ways of not choosing, I can roll dice, 2 dice, 6 sided, 7 sided, rock paper scissors , drawing straws.

The freedom of my will is overwhelming, I am startled by my choices galore

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 17:17:47 2022 No.19897803 >>19897774 >I, the seer of these options, am aware that it is entirely up to me, to choose describe the nature of the choice itself, you are merely describing an array of possible choices but this says nothing as to how they came to being

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 17:27:16 2022 No.19897854

Children in the internet that tend to proclaim there is no freewill most often do so due to in many cultures and society the belief of the correct method or greatly restricting a child's free will to much more greatly give that child access to freedom when they are older:

Tuck on your shirt, comb your hair, brush your teeth, eat your vegetabls, do your homework, don't go play, study, don't watch tv, study, don't read that, read this, don't think that, think this, dont do that, do this.

So that eventually, in highschool, in college, after college, after after college, the grown child will have access to greater freedoms, than if they failed to do all those original tasks.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 17:35:10 2022 No.19897904

>>19897715
Most has to do with keeping to the middle class or respectable working class lane one was born in, maintaining the autopilot of moral and professional conformity. Those who exceed this lane, this corridor, this matrix, do so sparingly and if productively within the confines of the scientific method or particular technical or commercial endeavors, most of so called free wills consists of following physical structural and mental rat mazes that thousands or even millions of people decades or even centuries ago lay before you.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:04:43 2022 No.19898089 >>19897774 Take your meds

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:06:23 2022 No.19898094 >>19897904 This has nothing to do with class. When you say someone is wrong on a fundamental level you are calling them a fraud. This hurts all people that are not very well addressed. The wealthy are not in any way at all safe from this.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:07:30 2022 No.19898100 >>19897904 >>19898094 But yes, most of your lot in life is decided before you are born.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:09:24 2022 No.19898111

>>19897803
(1/2 )

Are you forcing me to make a single choice?

I didn't say I was nessecarily going to make a choice, just that I'm aware of the options.

If you desire me, of your own free accord, you could possibly not desire me to make such a choice; there can only be one single choice made? In this event.

There is no guiding reason as to why I would choose one activity over the other, so I could either choose one at random, which may subtley result in me chosing an activity based on a word I prefer aesthetically like right over left, quicker over slower, I may think quicker might be more exciting who knows why, who knows what exciting is or why I would base my choice on it brain chemicals,
I could roll a dice but have never really enjoyed dice games, craps have always confused me the complexity of which shyed me away from learning how to play, Yahtzee I used to play as a kid, but maybe lost one too many times which made me despise the chance or chance, so maybe that is how I would choose rock paper scissors, because I have a little more active involvement at least than dice, bit yes then again there we are even more difficult this time to make a choice In a fraction of a second, Rock paper or scissors, and even still besides trying to cheat it is still as chancey as the dice.

Did I choose to write these words, could I have wrote others, I know I could have easily written lol succ me balls fecker kek kek kek. But I want to play a along and try to ascertain any aspect of this mystery.

I am not even sure ascertain is an appropriate word there I thought as I was typing it, but went with it because I don't care if it's right or not one might get what I mean, I am aware I could have easily changed it to elucidate or discover or enlighten but then I would have to choose between them, though I am aware I could choose all three, which I often do, I am also aware I can remove that bit about ascertain, I was aware of that possibility the moment after I wrote It and while I was writing the bit about the three candidate words I was giddy to get to the part where I make it known I am aware I could remove it. Now my attention was just interrupted by someone walking near me and I lost my train of thought, I was heading somewhere else but now we will never know. Now I have no clue what I was even talking about, however I am aware if I want I can scroll up and check.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:10:28 2022 No.19898116

>>19898111
>>19897803
(2/2)

The reason I would not want to scroll up and check is I am lazy, the reason I would because it may continue this possible amusing post which I am having fun with , why do I dictate my activities based on fun? Because fun is easier and more enjoyable than not fun? What decides what is easier and enjoyable? How often do I choose to do things not fun? Should I scroll up right now? Now I am nervous that if I scroll up to check that ... I just heard a speaking voice which distracted my attention .... train of thought I lost there would be nothing to attach on to and continue, a thought I recall having when I first said I was aware I could scroll up.

To be honest I was quite confident ascertain was an appropriate word, but I am aware I didn't want to look it up or think about it, I found it humorous to continue the way it did, why did I choose to do what I found humorous, because it is fun,

So rock paper scissors just as chancey as dice and straws, you really want me to choose some of those body motions in an order huh?

Well my gut says to choose them all, as that might be the best way of avoiding s choice. Because I can't do them all exactly once, I am aware there are too many degrees of freedom Involved to perform all the listed actions at once, they must be performed all in some order, and since every order is equal, again there is no guiding principle to choose which order to perform these in, and if there were a guiding principle where would that have come from, I would be aware I could follow it or not.

Do I will pass the ball back to you and say you write the order of the body actions I shall perform, and tell me why you write them the way you did?

We see I started with left arm, then right arm... Sensible enough, I could have started with feet or head, I was thinking of using the body as example, but the arms are very personal, I was thinking of even writing, and intimate but decided against it, I was seeing my fingers type on my screen and so thought of arm first, naturally legs follow being in the family of extremeties, then it's just listing the awareness of the degrees of freedom, any other would do so I chose any. I could have easily started with legs, then said arms, I swear I promise it was possible, I am capable of such; I almost didn't write the comma between it was possible .... I am capable of such, I am aware that would have made the sentence read different so I added the comma as my intention intended.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:15:12 2022 No.19898150 >>19898116 >>19898111 >He thinks hes responsible for these words You poor distressed animal

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:28:29 2022 No.19898220 >>19898150 I was aware I could have written zero words, from this awareness I prefered to write more than zero, because I prefer something to nothing very often, so I chose which words to write

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:34:22 2022 No.19898255

>>19897803
You are aware you have different options right now, they are limited, you are somewhat aware of their bounty and their limitations.

Now if right now $10,000,000 was placed in your bank account, you would be aware the limits of your options would be somewhat increased. Obviously the scope of your will to be free has increased. The awareness of ones degrees of freedom, of ones options, of ones possible choices, and the ultimate responsibility relying on the awareness, the will, is all that can be meant by 'free will', that your awareness is not forced to choose an option, that your awareness deliberates amongst it's selves, and votes and concludes its will to act on an option

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:42:38 2022 No.19898300 >>19898220 Are you 13

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:43:45 2022 No.19898306 >>19896133 Free will and questions related to it are cool and all but does the answer actually matter beyond being a way to excuse your shortcomings?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:45:41 2022 No.19898317 >>19898220 You did not choose to have this idea, it chose you.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:48:26 2022 No.19898331

>>19898306
The cycle of non free repetition can be broken in discrete instances or intervals, for example, if I were a scientist and able to prove the reality of, let's say, telepathy, after which I return to the rote control of habit, custom, upbringing, externally imposed institutionalal rules, reflexes, instincts, subconscious and unconscious drives and impetuses.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:49:11 2022 No.19898333

>>19898220
But there is also a great attractor, an ideal explanation that is my guiding principle, so I admit im a slave to the best possible outcome. The best possible (full of gray areas and rainbows of course, full of discussion and debate, options, ambiguities, knowns and unknowns) outcome is that eternally existing ideal in all forms I strive to see, and then write towards capturing.

So yes all possibilities are known, I am detetmined freely by self and nature to pursue the objectively best ones. But, sometimes I don't choose the best, sometimes being aware of better options I choose the less, then that is merely a moment if falsely weighing what best means

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:51:18 2022 No.19898340 >>19898300 Are you able to provide any not not an arguements? And yes, in spirit I am eternally 13, 18, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 40, 45, 55, 70, 99, and 1000 are you not 13?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:52:15 2022 No.19898345

>>19898306
The information can be utilized to your advantage. Better lungs get you up stairs faster. Get better lungs. A better brain helps you deal with humans better. So perhaps stop drinking so much, and eat healthy. Now your goals are actually attainable. You can't unlearn information, and that is why thought and knowledge is part of your total lack of free will. You MUST act with regard to new information, you can't evade it. So in terms of intellectual utility, learn more, and more, and more, you don't lose it until old age. These are force multipliers.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:52:35 2022 No.19898346 >>19898306 >Free will and questions related to it are cool and all but does the answer actually matter I just killed someone.... But I had no choice, the universe forced me to

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:53:16 2022 No.19898350 >>19898340 Humans cannot create random numbers, but you are still in middle school and don't know about that yet.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 18:59:26 2022 No.19898381 >>19897599 >>19898111 >>19898255 >>19898333 I geuss you guys think I did not freely will these digits, if I had gotten this one too then maybe you would believe >>19897774

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 19:17:28 2022 No.19898490

Zzzzz

X --> Y (no free will)

X --> Z (pretending you have free will)

Its a leap of faith based off idealism.

You might end up at Y no matter what, but if you pretend you have free will you might go to Z.

If you pretend or not you lose nothing. So you might at well adopt the proposition it exists.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 20:43:21 2022 No.19898920 >>19898490 I lose my natural innocence I will not

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 20:47:46 2022 No.19898940 So basically all I received are vacillating non-answers Guess I was right

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 20:48:57 2022 No.19898947 is a subconscious emanation of the will intentional?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 21:08:54 2022 No.19899025 >>19898947 there is no intent which precedes the emanation, and if there is we merely shift to the consideration of this instead as our point of origin, so did the emanation intend for itself to exist ex-nihilo?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 21:32:03 2022 No.19899116

>>19896133
>it's reality determines...true moral accountability
Exactly the opposite. It removes responsibility from those deemed themselves to be moral authority in seeking to hold others "accountable"
>>19898346
I hate my existence. I'm a tyrant. I just did a genocide. But it doesn't matter because it was the will of God.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 21:36:48 2022 No.19899132

>>19898940
There is perfect order, absolute chaos, and everything in between.

Every choice you make nessecarily falls into some catagory.

All possible choices are possible choices.

You allign yourself with a catagory you wish to pursue

Every choice you make is freely made even if the choices have consequences that are or aren't beneficial to you.

I can freely choose to eat or not to eat. If I want to live. I cannot freely choose not to eat.

Some wants are genetic, instinctual, some wants are learned, developed, some wants (relate the term wants in these examples to, wills) are discovered, some wants are generated, some wants are explored.

Non nessecary wants usually correlate to a feeling good.

If one prefers to feel good rather than feel bad, and then choose choices that make them feel good you will call this relation a lack of free will... But they can partake in activities that make them feel bad, but they choose not to, because they would prefer not to.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 21:42:40 2022 No.19899154 >>19899132 >>19898255 see >>19899025

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 21:45:07 2022 No.19899169 >>19898255 >that your awareness deliberates amongst it's selves, and votes and concludes its will to act on an option see >>19899025 failure to describe this "deliberation", and to answer this basic question here >>19899025

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 22:38:48 2022 No.19899390

(1/3)
>>19899154
>>19899169
I already explained it many times in many ways, you are failing to understand.

The answer is: a plethora of arbitrariness (freedom) allows any of a number of options tp be equally chosen.

Just because physicsly, a person can only choose one thing at a time, does not negate that that individual chose that thing.

You would suggest they chose that thing because they were determined to.

I would say their awareness did the determining and did so freely.

There are always factors that go into choices.

But the choice required the awareness itself, to enact the action, it is self forcing, this is the mystery of The Hard Problem. Conciousness is the only thing we know in the universe that can escape strict strict determinism.

It does this because it simulates reality, in the head phenomena and sensations are the 'atoms' that interact to create events.

Material in the head is making projections, copies of materials in the world.

The individual to some non trivial degrees can control the imagery in the head.

I didn't invent birds and bees and clouds and trees and flowers: this world placed images of these things in my head.

I have only the base Inputed material to work off of, to compile the possible images in my head.

The realm of my head operates differently then the realm outside of it, it is a different system composed of particular stuff.

It can ''''suspend time''': it can access images it has seen 5 or 10 days or years ago.

It has a catalogue of images. It can see multiple images at once, it can see multiple concepts and images at once.

It can combine multiple concepts and images in different ways continously and not, in it's own unique time space.

It is aware more and less degrees, it can be more and less aware of the relation ship chains branching of each image, the network of how all things and possibilities are connected.

It is established not of it's own accord, with a preference for enjoyment, wellness, cheeredness, pleasure, as opposed to it's opposites.

It is aware there's a large range of subtleties between possible pleasentries and pleasures.

The monks prove individuals are capable of only doing nearly nothing.

Many are unable or undesiring of doing this; one might say their free will is pressured to not be bored, or to not only do nothing.

So we are established we are compelled to do something. Then there is to determine every second of life what is it that we want to do.

Might we detetmine this with no guiding principle, might we every second choose to do an entirely different thing?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 22:40:13 2022 No.19899395

>>19899390
>>19899169
>>19899154
(2/3)
It seems evolution perhaps settled away from this, or perhaps in child rearing. There is a way to feel accepting, relaxed, well content, commiting to activities. So that after a second, we are ok with not choosing to do something else.

So we must be guided by principles. The principles of pain and pleasure were established for us.

But in this moment there are many pleasures to choose from, 1 of 100 snacks, 1 of 100 sports, 1 of 100 games, 1 of 100 tv shows, 1 of 100 movies, 1 of 100 restaurants, 1 of 100 women, 1 of 100 porns, 1 of 100 arts and crafts, 1 of 100 sciences, 1 of 100 books, 1 of 100 beaches, 1 of 100 candle scents, 1 of 100 musics. Etc.

We can't make every choice at once. We are aware of every possible choice, but we can only relatively, practically do a few things at once.

Now what does determine what we may ultimately choose. A lacking in some pleasure?(if I am freezing cold I would be lacking the pleasure of warmth, hungry the pleasure of food, etc. But when all my nessecities are taken care of, the only pleasure I am lacking, is the pleasure of not being bored, of not doing nothing) I am lacking in all those pleasures, but I can't recieve them all at once, so then do I decide what to obtain based on practicality and logistics? Perhaps I could yes, that would be compelling and containing a pressure towards it. Convienience is also a possible pleasure.

So how do I determine how in this moment I should fill my boredom, that is the question. And how much of Me is doing the determining. And what exactly is this Me that is doing the determining. How does it know what it wants. How does it know it is making the right choice.

My body tells me to degrees; I am hungry get a snack, cravings, sweet, sour, tangy, salty. My body tells me sex is pleasurable, and exciting experiences, beauty is involved, my body tells me beauty is preferable to view and experience.

My body has an excess of energy, so sport may be fun, gameness is exciting, to interact with the world, to operate the body, make it move and occur actions. To play with energy and matter in complex ways. What is a game or sport with out rules. What could life be without pain or pleasure, laws of physics.

I am aware there is time in the day, there are days in a week, there are weeks in a month.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 22:41:44 2022 No.19899405

>>19899154
>>19899169
(3/3)
I am aware there is time in the day, there are days in a week, there are weeks in a month.

I cannot experience all possible joys in this one moment. But luckily I remember there are weeks and months. So I am aware I can choose some things to do today, and something's to do tommorow. And next week. This snack today, this snack tommorow.

By spreading out the intense ultimatum, the nessecary absolute singularity of any desicsion, the panic of the singular moment only having room to contain a singular choice; easing into, giving into, trusting a smooth plane of time; I am aware I will still be I in days, and though I cannot experience all joys now, I will acceptingly choose to experience them all in due time.

But still how to determine which to choose now. Oh it doesn't matter, I like them all.

Do I play video games, watch a movie, watch tv, read a book, paint a painting, write a story, write a poem, go out and do photography, make a film, play pool, go swimming, play basketball, play rackettbal, play shuffle board, play soccer, play guitar, record piano, record singing, composed for flute and cello and harpsichord or violin and recorder and Oboe, make ceramics, design fashion, a shirt or dress or shoes, or architectural facades, or interior designs.

What is it that determines what I will do now.

What ever may be the most rewarding? Moneterily? Emotionally? Physically? Emotionally? Spiritually? The best combo of all?

And after an hour of one, recieving fulfilment, I may move onto another with out such the care of the reward?

Whatever I haven't done in a while? Or perhaps if I am in the zone from doing it often lately? Then randomly the feeling of being burnt out? Ideas exhausted. Very understandable.

So.

Eman Nep Wed Feb 9 22:48:00 2022 No.19899428

>>19899154
>>19899169
We need to work or way up to arriving at ideas and understanding, don't expect instant proof. For instance, I think we get somewhere relavant in this topic when when I bring up this point:

You are aware you have different options right now, they are limited, you are somewhat aware of their bounty and their limitations.

Now if right now $10,000,000 was placed in your bank account, you would be aware the limits of your options would be somewhat increased.
***

That is extremely non trivial to this discussion, that it is possible for ones range of options and choices to exponentially increase in an instant.

That there is such a thing of greater and lesser options, choices, freedom, fir the same individual, in the matter of a second.

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 23:12:42 2022 No.19899492

>>19899428
if that part of the will which is truly free(not dependent on necessity) exists, it either had to create itself from nothing, or it was dependent upon externalities and ultimately God. Is this not so? this is really the essential point here
Furthermore, if the will is free in the sense of non-necessity, this is the same as total indifference no? If the will preferred something absent necessity, then why did it prefer this thing? The will has personality, a character? But it chose this character, because it is free of necessity and was therefore exists with total indifference? But how could a totally indifferent substrate which is free of necessity and influence from causality be drawn to any such decision at all? How could something which exists as essentially a non-character then choose a character from which its preferences flow?

Anonymous Wed Feb 9 23:18:19 2022 No.19899508

>>19899428
>>19899492
also, I don't see the availability of options as true freedom, but the non-necessity of the act of choosing. This of course brings the problem of the origin of the choice if it did not necessarily proceed from something. Did it choose itself to be itself, and then of course the problem is placed back a step. Either a thing willed itself into existence from nothing or was created as a result of something else. How can there be an alternative?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 9 23:26:53 2022 No.19899533 File: 142 KB, 627x376, hume.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Take the Hume pill.

Eman Nep Thu Feb 10 01:56:38 2022 No.19899989

>>19899492
(1/2)
>if that part of the will which is truly free(not dependent on necessity) exists, it either had to create itself from nothing, or it was dependent upon externalities and ultimately God. Is this not so?

Awareness/conciousness/the will, we are speaking about humans here, did not will it self into existence. Think about babies, think or how long it takes babies to develop their will, understanding of the world. A year or more, 365 times around the sun, a continuous need of food energy and visual and otherwise relational cues, capturing images of the world in it's head, slowly and surely capturing the relations and catagories between those images, and scales and charts and graphs of personal relations to them; this process is the developing of the mind, the jumpstarting of the will. A push and pull, between the burgeoning will, the outer wills of others, the determined processes of the outer world, and the determined internal processes of the body and brain, head starting, catapaulting, avalanching snowballing into a will, which then wink wink takes on a mind of it's own, using the momentum of that child hood development process to continue, now needing less help from an outsider pointing to apple and tree and rain and clouds and sun and burn and ponds and ducks and fish and pan and dog and toy and pet and bark, to... Get the picture, to get the idea of this understanding stuff, to then the individual is all the sudden without training wheels, without bumpers, doing it all by itself, in possession of it's imagination, of it's thinking and wondering, aware of possible trains of thought. Questing questioning, how curious kids are, wondering, seeking seeking understanding, looking for connections out in the world, to help make bigger and clearer the web of connections in the head.
Using the idea of interactions between things, the idea, the concept of catagories, to play with things in the head, mix and match, think, ponder, desire, enjoy. To see the world is composed of objects, and their interactions ruled by physical reasons, to use the idea of reasons, of reason, to use your imagination and will to navigate the possibility of the world and your desires.

>The will has personality, a character?
I would think it possibly has many. There are moods, and there are writers who possess many characters in themselves. Though ok yea, a character, the unique way body and brain develop with mind and world, memories and imagination second by second, making conclusions about itself, it's potentials, it's desires, how it can get away with being, how it may have discovered it is rewarded for being.

Eman Nep Thu Feb 10 02:07:18 2022 No.19900026

>>19899508
>>19899492

>But how could a totally indifferent substrate which is free of necessity and influence from causality be drawn to any such decision at all?
I don't think the will is free from causality, it is aware there are many causalities and it can consider the various benefits of them, and furthermore, ultimately it is the cause of which it chooses, possibly for bundles of reasons, including genetic, physiologic, rarity, regularity, craving, psychological, memories, curiosity, adventure, ultimately will full understanding of going forward with a choice.

There are also constant nessecities, food, water, bathroom, sleep, the will meeks out it's way weaving through all nessecities. Steering itself in the direction it wants, it thinks is best, or worst, or in between.

>How could something which exists as essentially a non-character then choose a character from which its preferences flow?

Feedback loops, idk, I didn't know what baseball was, then I played baseball, compared to the boring nothing of my existence, I felt something and thought something, it was exciting captivating and fun, now my character is a baseball player.

>also, I don't see the availability of options as true freedom...
If you have 50 options, and you are about to make your choices you have mulled it all over, and then in a single second ($10,000,000 example) you have 1,000,000 new options. You will see that your freedom increased. You possess greater degrees of freedom. You possess more options. Even if you possesses awareness of 10 more possible choices, the power, the freedom of your will has increased.

>>	Anonymous Thu Feb 10 03:10:44 2022 No.19900157 >>19899492 >>19899508 Hope for your response later, I appreciate the questions and back and forth

>>	Anonymous Thu Feb 10 09:37:12 2022 No.19901440 >>19900157 I will get back to you in a little bit, catch ya later broheim

>>	Anonymous Thu Feb 10 10:40:30 2022 No.19901634 >>19899533 >Just distract yourself with hedonism bro lmao Spare me.

>>	Anonymous Thu Feb 10 12:49:29 2022 No.19902266 >>19901440 Ok looking forward to the continuation of out rapport brethern

>>	Anonymous Thu Feb 10 13:06:49 2022 No.19902357 >>19901440 this isn't me also I will respond later, I have to go to class

>>	Anonymous Thu Feb 10 14:48:21 2022 No.19902771 >>19902357 Ok broseph

>>	Anonymous Thu Feb 10 19:03:34 2022 No.19904021 bump

Anonymous Thu Feb 10 21:48:07 2022 No.19904751

>>19902771
Little bit, I'm just finishing up with my studies, placing my books in my knapsack now, then I'm going to head to the messhall for a capuchino, I will ponder deeply the contents of this thread while trying to see cute freshmen I might try to talk to.

>>	Anonymous Thu Feb 10 22:35:59 2022 No.19904933 >>19904751 stop

>>	OP Fri Feb 11 00:22:55 2022 No.19905281 writing my responses right now, thread is not dead

OP Fri Feb 11 01:05:17 2022 No.19905401

>>19899989
>>19900026
>>19900157
My(really Nietzsche's) main point is this: the will is innocent. To cast judgement on a will is to commit an absurd rape of logic. All that can be said is that a will is. Are we to judge it? How? And if we say that the will could have willed itself to be otherwise, we are presuming that the willing of the willing otherwise was itself willed...an infinite cycle follows and we may as well take the first instance of willing to be the sole instance. The will exists, perhaps independently of causality. Nevertheless, it IS. But why IS it thusly and not otherwise? Let us completely remove causality from our discussion.
***To blame the will for itself is to put existence on trial for existence!***

>>	Anonymous Fri Feb 11 05:19:08 2022 No.19906059 >>19905281 >>19905401 Will respond tommorow, keep the thread alive brev

Anonymous Fri Feb 11 09:05:27 2022 No.19906680

>>19896133
>For, in just the same way as people separate lightning from its flash and take the latter as an action, as the effect of a subject which is called lightning, so popular morality separates strength from the manifestations of strength, as if behind the strong person there were an indifferent substrate, which is free to express strength or not. But there is no such substrate; there is no "being" behind the doing, acting, becoming. "The doer" is merely made up and added into the action – the act is everything. People basically duplicate the action: when they see a lightning flash, that is an action of an action: they set up the same event first as the cause and then yet again as its effect. (...) "We weak people are merely weak. It's good if we do nothing; we are not strong enough for that" – but this bitter state, this shrewdness of the lowest ranks, which even insects possess (when in great danger they stand as if they were dead in order not to do "too much"), has, thanks to that counterfeiting and self-deception of powerlessness, dressed itself in the splendour of a self-denying, still, patient virtue, just as if the weakness of the weak man himself – that means his essence, his actions, his entire single, inevitable, and irredeemable reality – is a voluntary achievement, something willed, chosen, an act, something of merit.

This has never been refuted. Instead we only get a lot of coping from guys like Chesterton and Russell who attack straw men rather than address arguments of Nietzsche's like this one, because there is no way to address it, because it is too overwhelmingly spot on for any human being to tackle it. You can only cope or, to quote Wittgenstein, pass over it in silence.

>>	Anonymous Fri Feb 11 12:41:18 2022 No.19907612 >>19905401 Will read later

Anonymous Fri Feb 11 13:10:37 2022 No.19907761

>>19906680
Strong men and weak men (some scientists, mathmaticians are strong someare weak) worked together over thousands of years, to develop man's abilities and living potentials. What that quote is claiming is to go backwards to warring tribes, to make the base of life, violent conflict. The activity between lion and gazzelle, to schizm the game and play of human society into constant fear and panic.

Unless it is suggesting for the strong to team up, now that they benefitted greatly using the abilities of some of the weak, to quickly kill them all, and establish the world of the strong, and we assume the strong will not conflict with the strong, even though Nietszches point seems to be that those who know they are strong must do what they want/feel. We assume the strong will never try to kill it take advantage of the strong, they will never naturally have the desire to do this, so the strong will create a peaceful utopia of strong, and though children comparitively are never strong, the weak children, which is all of them,will not be raped and tortured, because we presume the strong man, the total collection of strong men would prefer to live in a world of peace with one another, over a world of constant fear and battle.

The weak men also do not need to all be killed by the strong men, if the strong men still wish to utilize them, they may be shackled, haven't even thought of women in this sceanario, but likely they will all be shackled, if the collection of strongmen, the transformers like uberestmensch of ubermensches finds them ultimately weak.

If an ubermensch happened to for whatever reason unshackle a woman, that free weaker then ubermensche woman may be shackled up right again by another ubermensche.

I geuss the interesting part is just the ubernenche meeting it's match in another ubermensche agrees to not test it's so comparable attributes, there is too much uncertainty of outcome trying to take advantage of equals.

And then, the ubermenschest of the ubermensche are so rare in number, the absolute strongest, men, are much lesser in number than the slightly less stronger,and slightly less stronger. So if that small number of strongest together tried to exert their will, against the next rungs below, they would very very likely be defeated.

So the uberest possible mensches would never be allowed to be.

Any thoughts on this so far?

>>	Anonymous Fri Feb 11 16:18:08 2022 No.19908621 >>19907761 Good post friendo, I will respond in a little bit, I am just putting my texts in my book bag then there I'll mosey on over to the canteen and grab myself an espresso, catch ya later pal

>>	Anonymous Fri Feb 11 16:19:19 2022 No.19908631 >>19906680 The prisons and jails of the world are chock full of ubermensches

Anonymous Fri Feb 11 16:44:55 2022 No.19908761

>>19905401
I gave so many examples trying to sway you from your simplistic thinking.

You are so attached to only thinking about one single infintesimal 1 dimensional thing at a time, refusing to consider multitudes of things can be seen and thought at once.

And that the perception or recording of time blurs or ceases to the observer.

1 thought a second, 20 thoughts a second, visualizing 1 one dimensional object in a smooth 5 seconds, visualizing ten 3 dimensional objects full of qualities details attributes in a rhythemless 5 seconds.

There is not a metronome in the head, though I agree it is hard to stop thought all together. This inability to stop the mind, and this really may begin to touch about something central to this topic, may be a great contributor of human advancement.

The mind needs to feed. The mind loses its mind dealing with the same handful of thoughts over and over and over. Simple monkey thoughts only over and over and over.

So the mind got curious, and more curious. And when it learned more and more about the nature it found itself in and of, it had more and more novelty with which to occupy it's mind, more information, more images, more objects, more sensations, with which to internally and externally play with, to further escape itself from the ultimate brutal simplicity of absolutely nothing.

We presume individuals living long in solitary confinement have no choice but to day dream, to entirely live in fantasy, and ourselves when not occupied with explicit tasks, often do the same.

I just went on a 5 minute walk to get lunch. I couldn't tell you one of the 1000 thoughts I had, memories, desires, wonders, seeing objects, trees, grass, sensation of walking, an itch, cars driving by, the people in them, what slices of pizza I may get, I said I couldn't tell you a thought I had but I geuss my memory was just jogged, a little chilly but warmest it's been, and these words are hardly the jingle jangle visiony inaginationy way the thoughts occured, this way and that way, I don't want to think of that, drag the mental cursor to what I may be doing tonight, consider my obligations for the weekend, what kind of drink should I get with lunch, this gravel feels cool on the feet, abd makes a sound, crunch snow, all these thoughts visions and sensations occuring concurrently continumnly, many things being in many sensorial ways brought to my attention, while navigating the outer world and my inner world of memories and projections of possible futures.

>>	Anonymous Fri Feb 11 16:47:34 2022 No.19908781 >>19896133 people who deny free will are usually suicidal. like trannies, almost.

Anonymous Fri Feb 11 17:03:00 2022 No.19908837

>>19905401
You can be locked in a small cage and fed only crackers. Or you can exist in the world with $10,000,000.

Firstly would you admit that Freedom does exist, that freedom relates to quantity and quality of options and choices, and that the second example you would be considered more free?

Secondly, if I were to ask you to pick which sceanario you would like to live, we now see that 'great attractor' idea come into play, even though technically you do have free choice, you, you, you, are free to choose, no one outside of you is choosing for you, there are two options, the choice is Yours, the choice is up to you to make inside yourself, you and yourself inside yourself will decide with yourself the decision; however if you are (very fitting word) Sensical, you are forced to choose the second option.

We can easily see how increasing the amount and complexities of the choices could make the decision less dependable on some pure and absolute blatant obviousness of 'Sensicality', if there is no in any way dependably objectively provable most reasonable decision, if there are at once 1000 equally reasonable choices that you can make, then it is entirely dependent on you to deliberate and come to conclusions any means you see fit, to determine which choices you will choose moment to moment.

>>	Anonymous Fri Feb 11 17:09:15 2022 No.19908855 >>19896461 Obviously.

Anonymous Fri Feb 11 19:13:12 2022 No.19909417

>>19907761
>What that quote is claiming is to go backwards to warring tribes, to make the base of life, violent conflict
No it isn't. You seem to be projecting a bit onto the quoted passage.

>Unless it is suggesting for the strong to team up, now that they benefitted greatly using the abilities of some of the weak, to quickly kill them all, and establish the world of the strong
It's not this either.

You are taking a descriptive statement and turning it into a normative one, while neglecting the actual underlying normative statement of the passage. Nietzsche is not saying "the strong shall rule," but "those intelligent enough to distinguish the strong and the weak shall rule." And who precisely IS the strong, the weak, or the intelligent? Through the full understanding of that passage and many others, Nietzsche demonstrates and illustrates all three categories of humanity.

Anonymous Fri Feb 11 20:29:26 2022 No.19909811

>>19909417
No I wasnt projecting, what I said I'd absolutely drawn from and applicable to the quote. You are just going a step further by distinguishing the intelligent to be in the strong catagory; wherin there we might make distinctions between the possible scales and ranges ranking; strength and weaknesses of body and mind/intelligence.

You are the one in fact projecting, that strength can only be applied to the most intelligent. For surely some Mr Universe could have snapped Einsteins neck.

Buy ok, I will admit my slight ignorance. Nieyszche was not talking about physical strength at all? Hid belief I this topic is that those with more powerful minds should prey on those with weaker. Why did he not continue this pattern to bodies?

And everything I wrote of strength of body translates to strength of mind. The insuing possible worlds if certain ideas were fully realized

>>	Anonymous Fri Feb 11 22:41:49 2022 No.19910368 >>19909811 Interesting post bruver, I'm just applying my notes into my satchel before I swing on by to the cafeteria and pick myself up a hot cocoa, catch ya later sport

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 12 00:12:28 2022 No.19910656 >>19908781 not an argument

Anonymous Sat Feb 12 00:24:16 2022 No.19910696

>>19908837
let us suppose that one is limited by nothing, and has infinite choices. It is entirely dependent on you to determine yourself. So your choice is dependent on nothing except your choice. But this says nothing aside from what is obviously true, and is a tautology. The act itself is everything, and is neither free nor unfree as both imply a causal link where none exists. The will simply is. There is no arguing around this point. Therefore, existence is innocent.
See Kant's Third Antimony: http://philosophyfaculty.ucsd.edu/faculty/ewatkins/Phil106S07/ThirdAntinomy.html

Anonymous Sat Feb 12 00:30:18 2022 No.19910713

>>19910656
How? Most value judgments should be based on sense data and if I have witnessed the deaths of these creatures due to suicide, it would follow that anyone who believes their lives to be predetermined would follow suit. In all seriousness determinism is true for their believers as free will is true for THEIR believers. Its a matter of individual perspective. You are your own sculptor, after all. You create you.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 12 00:32:43 2022 No.19910718 >>19910713 we are discussing the thing in itself, not the consequences of belief the idea in itself is a tautology and nonsensical as I have stated numerous times, read the thread

Eman Nep Sat Feb 12 03:58:17 2022 No.19911212

>>19910696
>let us suppose that one is limited by nothing, and has infinite choices. It is entirely dependent on you to determine yourself. So your choice is dependent on nothing except your choice.

(1/?)
Well choice is dependant on a lot, I don't think I ever implied it wasn't. Could reality be anything other than ultimately limited, as hard and damn sure impressive as it's trying, appearing as it is churning out inexhaustible infinite infinities. Ultimately are there limits, so that even if God sat you next to him you in soul form and gave you eternity to think of and make whatever you could imagine, what might be the result of that? To design your own universe, fundamentally from the ground up, it would have to 'physically logically' work right, limitations are required for freedoms, apparently one can get much more out of the infinities created using laws and orders(laws of physics) then if matter and energy was ruled purely by randomness, though who knows, sometimes in music flurries of randomness is very powerful and nice, but how much sustainable variety is on that. I digress.

Again to design your universe you would need to utilize some possible shapes; ultimately all, even any theoretical God is limited by what is possible. There is only that which is possible.

So we can either choose something based on randomness or choose something based on rule, and this is the connundrum aye.

Reason, or no reason.

So it is determined that we have to eat. To degrees it is determined what we have to eat (not rocks). We enter a grocery store and see 20,000 items. It is no longer fully determined by nature beyond our mind what we have to eat. And surely whatever means of choosing what to get from the grocery store, many people in many times of history did not have 20,000 food items in front of them to choose from. So now there are all sorts of factors that will determine which items you will choose, some genetic, some had a bad experience with certain food in childhood, some texture gives you the bad chills, some items you have never tried and afraid to try because you are convinced your not the type of person to just randomly try new foods, how much money you have, if you consider something too expensive, a certain brand you do or don't like for reasons x y z, there's a girl in the aisle your trying to impress, do you buy the fancy coffee in front of her, are you the kind of person to do that, do you want to, where does that want come from, is it your want, do you agree with the want, what about you agrees with it, do you think it's good, do you want to want, do you like to want, do you like to get, you like the rewarding feelings of getting, life itself is getting, continous getting, maybe 99 out of 100 days you wouldn't get the fancy coffee to show off, maybe 999 out of 1000 days you wouldn't strike up a conversation with her,

Eman Nep Sat Feb 12 04:01:42 2022 No.19911224

>>19910696
>>19911212
(2/?)
is this the day, what would make this the day, why this day and not the previous 243 oppurtunities to talk to a girl in the market, does she strike you that much more than the others, or have you reached the braking point of lonliness, what established that breaking point, what amount of aligning stars or nerves, is she the prettiest and is this spurring you on, or is she the ugliest so you feel more confident, if you ask her and she says no you can feel that embaressment and shame, you may never be able to shop here again, oh but come on, there are guys that don't think a second to talk to any girl they want, to ask them out or anything, why don't you just do that, if she says yes good things will occur, doesn't the good vastly outweigh the bad, don't you have to risk the bad occuring to get the good, you might as well get the fancy coffee in front of her and strike up a conversation, ok yes, so there is a determined natural desire in you to want to be with a woman, this is forcing you into this sceanario, you have no free will in the sense that as you need food and water you need a woman, so causally forced to consider talking to this one, you did not free will the idea of your shame possibly existing, as being any obstacle for just possibly speaking, but maybe If you desire you could work on restricting your shame there, to have no doubt to try to talk to any girl, you did and did not to degrees determine your looks, your ugliness or attractiveness determines possibly your amount of fear or shame in trying to chat her, you can to degrees train yourself to say I will not care about anything I will talk to all these girls no matter what and if my body produces shame feelings I will laugh and embrace it because my body wants me to talk to girls, I want to talk to girls, my body is scared to talk to girls, I'm scared to talk to girls, but I need to talk to girls, i agree with my want to talk to girls, it is possible to resist this want, but it could be painful resisting, so is it really my choice if I am choosing what is least painful, maybe I can choose which girl I will talk to, that is not as determined as my general need to talk to a girl at all, so what about this one strikes me to talk to her, what about her face do I find bearable, i have seen many bearable girls faces, that I could marry and not get sick of seeing, what determines that, my sense of beauty or bearability, her harmonies and proportions, I did not determine the existence of harmonies and proportions, I did not determine geometry, nor that it is pleasing to see, order, organized, neat and tidy, equal, even, though I did not determine the existence of these things is it at least me that agrees with their coolness, their goodness, their impressiveness, do I have any power or say to say that, and would you or I really believe it is actually me saying, for tommorow I may be completely sick of the rectangle, unerved by the square,

Eman Nep Sat Feb 12 04:04:10 2022 No.19911231

>>19910696
(3/?)
though I must quickly remind myself my momentary boredom, of this perfect eternal monotony, on the gut or visual level is understandable to a novelty consuming machine, though I must intellectually concede the supremecy of the simple giants shoulders used for such standing, the importances, building blocks and such, and with the simple static notes of the scale how many songs can be made, and how many tunes and melodies are unequal in kind and harmony and proportion yet equal in beauty, and what determines exactly my agreement with these, the raw facts of the qualities of sound playing my instrument ear, and my intellectual and imaginational journey of considering what these musical lines and flights of fancy correlate to deep thoughts and feelings, relatable ones to my memories and times in my life, to marvel at another minds love and dedication to beauty, and craftsman ship, and digging deep for rare ideas, sophisticated ideas, complex, elegant, difficult to come about, or sublimley natural, pure, flowing, groove, to sing, to aim blindly with nothing, towards thee, or, sorry, a, timeless melody, and what did determine that composer, to remove this or that note, adjust it this or that half step, quarter or eighth, this or that tempo, and then you realize the coffee girl must have left like ten minutes ago, just kidding she's still there, and you conclude you will speak to her, but did you conclude, did you conclude, who concluded, how did you conclude, didn't we establish you were determined to conclude, that you must talk to her, you have no choice because nature determined for you that you must talk to girls, but nature concluded you must talk to girls, but nature did not conclude you must talk to this girl, is that not up to you, what determines you talking to this girl, we already went over it a bit, but you still have the power to not talk to her if you wanted, if you want, you have the power to talk to her if you want, what will determine if you do or not, a number of weighings, and maybe on one day, you, what would determine the weighing to be adequate for yes and another day no, what you ate for lunch that day, if you were wearing your favorite shirt, what exactly makes that your favorite shirt, if your hair is looking particularly good or bad, those all these on the scale of judgement, and what will determine the final judgement, you can hardly take it any more, fuck it I'll just go talk to her, or fuck it i just wont talk to her, fuck it I will, fuck it I won't, she loves me she loves me not she loves me she loves me not, if you mix chance with determinism is it neither or both, if you stir just the right amounts and kinds of various chance with the right amounts and kinds of various determinisms, and you, whatever the heck you are is stuck there right in the middle juggling all these, might it count as a choice if you just say, I like the way that looks, but why,

Eman Nep Sat Feb 12 04:07:12 2022 No.19911238

>>19910696
(4/?)
, I like the way a million girls look but I can only choose one, I can choose many different items in the grocery store however, and many different flavors of coffee, but what exactly makes this one fancy, so one might be inclined to say because I am determined to speak to girls at all but nature, and determined to eat at all by nature, the choice is relatively superfluous, but does my will find a place in the cracks between all the micro and macro determinisms, spinning and twisting and cascading and dropping and rising fast and slow and frequent, does all this crazy interactions, billions and billions of things inside and beyond me on many scales all churning and interacting regularly and differently, does this produce some, most novel thing, considered me, a black or white or black and white hole or holes in the mind, is nature inventive and creative enough to give me myself, any part of myself, any idea of myself, of myselfness, yes limited by the unavoidability of matter and energy limits, and whatever possible chemical electrical mental picture static fuzz, is there a place for me inside myself, some sanctuary, some chamber, where I might map and measure in peace, I am aware of all the determinations, thus may I escape some, to be determined is to believe the magic tricks of nature, some are certainly real and true, but some I have learned the secret of the trick, thus I know, even if I have a gluten allergy, I still have the power to buy that gluten, I am determined by nature not to eat the gluten, I will not be determined, and I will buy it, I am determined by nature not to buy the fancy coffee, it is $10 and I only have $7, oh an idea, is it my idea or was it determined, I will ask the girl if she can lend me $5, here goes nothing, or here goes everything.

Eman Nep Sat Feb 12 04:09:27 2022 No.19911240

>>19910696
(5/5)
>The will simply is. There is no arguing around this point. Therefore, existence is innocent.
How is this concluded, how does this follow from your other points? What do you mean by innocent? If all humans agree on a rule, and back it up with reasons why it's a good rule, and you can choose to follow or break that rule, and to break that rule is to be said to perform an act thats not innocent, then in that moment the will was used not innocently, according to humans rules. And if there is a God that agrees with any human rules, and it was one of them you chose to break, God might have prefered you not to have chosen. Contextually, the will is innocent until it's not, after a guilty act the will may return to being innocent, the will is only not innocent, contextually, when it is doing that that is considered not innocent.

This is a good point regarding all the different laws between towns and countys and states and nations and religions.

What one does over here is guilty, the same thing over there is innocent.

Which is why in such haughty and severe conversations such as these, I always try to bring up the most universal.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 12 04:16:14 2022 No.19911259 >>19896461 Gödel showed that, if an axiomatic system is consistent, it cannot be complete. Therefore, there are true statements that cannot be proven. I think that applies here.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 12 10:30:59 2022 No.19912250 >>19910368 Take your sweet time honey, I've got another post coming right up babe

Anonymous Sat Feb 12 11:13:48 2022 No.19912405

>>19910696
Oh I forgot to include in my spiel the notion: define free will:
Define free
Define will
Define Free Will

And I didn't want to become obsessed with the written word but what I wrote last night mat have been the best I've ever written, although I am partial to this love poem I wrote. But yea I think I finally broke through beyond my old potential, now the previous addict in me would attempt to write more and more seeking that high, greater and higher, but I am not sure there is anything more I could say, I have written so much a few years ago, but I see it is getting to that flow state, where, and this is relavant actually and I admit it I didn't even intend it to be, while writing one sentence I am thinking about next possible following words and ideas, I am typing these words now and also thinking words and words ahead, hazy mental images of words and video clips I am trying to piece together the sentences following this one as I am sounding out these words I am now typing, this state of writing where the mind is swirling and stirring and all memories are called upon, the signals are sent to all the doors behind which memories are stored, signals are sent to all the banks of words, all occuring at the same time, a steady rhythem if time is all but suspended, besides this beat of my typing finger, and I geuss an always present general tick, or beat of the art, but it's not a long hear life to death ageing time, it is a timelessness that happens to have a metronome, and I have no clue that I would right these words when I started, the truly beautiful thing about literature, which I did mention about music, Everytime I start a little writing, I may have one general or specific idea, but no clue at all the places I will end up going, the turns if phrase, the if I may be granted, descisions, sometimes I have trouble spelling a word, while my memory is working on that, right along side it I am still chugging forward with visuals and other words, tossing these and those aside, following like roots of tree or lightning to the next branch, not that not that not that, that, why, because it is more fitting, says who, says why, says me and my tastes, but who chose my tastes, well over milenia the best and brightest and coolest and smartest most clever and appreciative and subtle and sensitive and daring and honorable and brilliant and lovely and loving folks naturally selected te best qualities of the world, as over milenia the fruit or the world was naturally selective, so that the shite fruit was neglected and the great fruits we know today were improved and innovated

Eman Nep Sat Feb 12 11:16:56 2022 No.19912416

>>19910696
2/?
so too then do I take my part I this process by selecting the sweetest and most charming assets and consider them the broad and refined attributes of my aesthetic taste, I am very selective and I am not, why and how, yada, this strain of thought seems to have wandered off, I don't recall where I was going, yet I was speaking of always premptively going, the fuzzy misty blurry clear mind haze of imagining took me too far from the concrete written moment and I lost my place, too many future flights of my taste and desires denied until the steam of my words halted and left with no further track, these trains of thought, this process, in the mind the train and the track and the stream and the sky are made of words and images and blurring and appearing and dissappraring as you are quickly opening and closing doors and tugging on roots of lightning and trees, and you and your minds are determinedly to degrees by the words you have just written and the ideas you just discarded though maybe they may be relavent a little down the line, and you are quickly responsible for the constant laying down of the track, you make an initial declaration, or was it made for you by ancient carvers of tablet stone, right now I want to write, why, what determines that, it could be a many number of things, including you've read books, determined writing is cool and you want to try, or I mean, what else is there besides that, you make an initial declaration, I want to write right, and then what follows, your interests, your fancies, your moods, your feelings, your words, your rhythems, your melodies, your tastes, your inflections, your relation to phonetics, your play, your mental singing and dancing, many different mental things going on at once at very near the speed of light. What will write in 2 sentences from now, I have no clue, they will be determined by what I write right here and now, or will there not be any more lines of writing might this one here be the very last one, I am not even sure, since im not writing periods I will say a sentence is between the commas and instead of sentence I will refer to it as a line , so I will not look but it seems I did already write 2 more lines, now I went back to include that part about sentences being refered to as lines, I just grappled with the potential of being lazy and writing sentences being referred as lines to avoid typing the 'to' part but concluded I may as well include it,

Eman Nep Sat Feb 12 11:18:42 2022 No.19912426

>>19910696
3/?
I don't recall why exactly, now I lost my train a bit I just debated in a fraction of a millisecond if I should write 'of thought' after train right there but determined it unnessecary, and yes I realize I could have written detetmined it 'was' unnessecary, so where was I going, I was actually building multiple trains and tracks at the same time winding and looping in different directions, trying to follow them all shiney and matte and changing all color, so you see I really had no clue where I was going, my head was empty and I was ready to call it a post, but I asked myself where I was going, and that simplified into the thinking of the train, and although that was not where I was going I don't think, it did blossom for me that imagery or the thought to include the multiple trains, to really drive home the concurrent multiplicity point, and a few lines ago never would I have imagined in my wildest dreams, or that when I questioned if this stream of them thought would go 2 more lines, that it would eventually include the terms concurrent multiplicity, though ifvcousmrse I should have known, and in a sense I did because those are just equal but different words equaling what I have already been mentioning, so now I'm really in the thick of it, no clue where I was heading and no clue where I've been and thus there is a strong urge to stop right here and call it a post, but I can also scroll up a bit and see if I see any trunks of ideas or branches I may shake to have fruit fall, I don't see any fruit, but maybe if I grab all the branches I see and shake or climb them I will see fruit or it will fall, and though part of me wants to end this here due to being tired, wanting to eat, scared if I scroll up I will see no more branches or fruit, or that they are getting thin and rotten, that the thickket is getting thicker or the barren field more sparse, and now people are loudly speaking in my house and I am distracted because now along with all I have been staying I have various voices saying various things of sensicality entering my head, and though I was admitting my wells possibly running dry and not only did this give me increased superficial content as a possible excuse and complaint for not continuing, but the content has interesting relation to topic expressing the grappling with multiplicity, but does my focusing on it and ignoring it conclude a lacking of multiplicity, I would say not because I have written many times about my trains of thought while hearing the voices of others distracting, it is harder but still possible, greater chances of losing the train,

Eman Nep Sat Feb 12 11:20:25 2022 No.19912432

>>19910696
4/4
and now there was an outburst if concern over a small kitchen fire, which actually occured about 10 lines ago but I needed to finish the thoughts, and now the concern died down so I could continue with thoughts though I thought the commotion of the fire would have been a nice excuse and end point to stop, and I am still able to scroll up and search for any branches I don't see the end of, but I really have been looking for an excuse to stop writing this for some time now, though the fun and excitement and mystery and reward of solving mystery and play ajd the colorful dancing winding looping thought trains determine that I keep writing , but for now I shall determine myself to stop, but am I detetmined to stop by nature because I have nothing else to say in the topic, well that may be true, but as I mentioned I could scroll up and see if anything sparks some more lines of thought, so no, and yes, and sort of maybe, i will call it quits, I promise, I will see to it that this writing stops right exactly now, but of course there is the pressure to be funny and write after saying it stops now, part of me truly planned to stop it right there at the word now, it wasn't till all the way starting the word now that I thought maybe I should continue, and then I was determined, forced by the prospect value of humor, alas, now.... Though again the scene is too established for humor it begs it, but ok I need to get out of bed and eat, so see ya later guys

Anonymous Sat Feb 12 11:24:02 2022 No.19912451

>>19897107
I wouldn't say "free will" doesn't exist, but its existence or non-existence affects nothing if acknowledged.

Someone says determinism is the truth: what has changed? A cup falls off a table. Does it look any different if determinism wasn't the truth? It's a subject not worth mulling over.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 12 11:28:36 2022 No.19912469 >>19912451 >It's a subject not worth mulling over. But you have no choice wheather to mull over it or not or the nature of your mulling according to you

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 12 11:34:14 2022 No.19912496 >>19905401 Ok babies, rocks and fools have no free will; a certain kind of smart people and rich people have free will, there I said it, are you happy?

Anonymous Sat Feb 12 12:05:03 2022 No.19912634

>>19905401
What determined you to make this thread when you did, did you really have no choice? What determined you to be si curious about this topic, where as there exists curious people in general and specific who are never so curious in this topic as to make posts online about it.

I had seen that green text image posted in threads days prior, I had previously believed I had satisfactorily proven to myself free will exists. The green image posted in threads was unattractive to ke to read, it was hard to make it big on my phone screen and scroll to the right to read the lines, but it just so happens for whatever stew of reasons, when you made this thread, and I was looking fir interesting threads, I geuss I said I may as well see if I can read the op image more clearly, it was still challenging and resistant to read, I blocked it from my memory the contents of that green image, just now I received the slightest tinge of curiosity to maybe gander and read it through, and see if anything new or old sparks something or supports previous conclusions of iffyness or annoyinty.

However, due to your dissatisfaction with previous response to the image, you started this thread, and it didn't just quickly become archived, wherin you may have given up for sometime, but you made this thread, I happened to be here to see it, I happened to muster up the will to engage, and start thinking and writing, and it reulted in me writing some of the best writing I've ever done, so that I thank you, and/or the universe and/or God and/or me

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 12 12:08:47 2022 No.19912646 >>19912496 >>19905401 >>19912496 >are you happy? And if you were not happy, could you free will determine yourself to be happy? Or would you be determined and forced to determine yourself to be happy because it is determined to be preferable?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 12 16:57:28 2022 No.19913920 >>19912646 >>19912634 Will respond a bit later brothora, I'm just tidying my papers into my brief case then I'm off to the food lounge to scoop up a milkshake, catch ya on the flip side my guy

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 12 17:02:23 2022 No.19913949 >>19896133 That's old shit. The problem today is to explain mental causation without substance dualism on the one hand but with causal closure without epiphenomenalism on the other.

Anonymous Sat Feb 12 17:17:46 2022 No.19914017

Here is the proof of free will--you are all free to leave. You lack the power of will to do so.

Power and freedom are not the same thing.

You could will something else, but you do not. Your choice reveals you to yourself. You are as you habitually do. If you truly willed it to be otherwise, it would be otherwise in so far as it was in your power to make it so.

Anonymous Sat Feb 12 18:06:53 2022 No.19914223

This thread is a mess. It's not even discussing anything written by Nietzsche specifically, just paraphrasing him loosely. For the discussion to get a little better moving forward, here's a complete aphorism with which to refer to:

Beyond Good and Evil, On the Prejudices of Philosophers #21:

>The causa sui [something being its own cause] is the best self-contradiction which has been thought up so far, a kind of logical rape and perversity. But the excessive pride of human beings has worked to entangle itself deeply and terribly with this very nonsense. The demand for "freedom of the will," in that superlative metaphysical sense, as it unfortunately still rules in the heads of the half-educated, the demand to bear the entire final responsibility for one's actions oneself and to relieve God, the world, ancestors, chance, and society of responsibility for it, is naturally nothing less than this very causa sui and an attempt to pull oneself into existence out of the swamp of nothingness by the hair, with more audacity than Munchhausen. Suppose someone in this way gets behind the boorish simplicity of this famous idea of the "free will" and erases it from his head, then I would invite him now to push his "enlightenment" still one step further and erase also the inverse of this incomprehensible idea of "free will" from his head: I refer to the "unfree will," which leads to an abuse of cause and effect. People should not mistakenly reify "cause" and "effect" the way those investigating nature do (and people like them who nowadays naturalize their thinking), in accordance with the ruling mechanistic foolishness which allows causes to push and shove until they "have an effect." People should use "cause" and "effect" merely as pure ideas, that is, as conventional fictions to indicate and communicate, not as an explanation. In the "in itself" there is no "causal connection," no "necessity," no "psychological unfreedom," no "effect following from the cause"; no "law" holds sway. We are the ones who have, on our own, made up causes, causal sequences, for-one-another, relativity, compulsion, number, law, freedom, reason, and purpose, and when we fabricate this world of signs inside things as something "in itself," when we stir it into things, then we're once again acting as we have always done, namely, mythologically. The "unfree will" is a myth: in real life it's merely a matter of strong and weak wills.

1/2

Anonymous Sat Feb 12 18:07:54 2022 No.19914228

>>19914223
>It is almost always already a symptom of something lacking in a thinker himself when he senses in all "causal connections" and "psychological necessity" some purpose, necessity, inevitable consequence, pressure, and unfreedom. That very feeling is a telltale give away - the person is betraying himself. And if I have seen things correctly, the "unfreedom of the will" has generally been seen as a problem from two totally contrasting points of view, but always in a deeply personal way: some people are not willing at any price to let go of their "responsibility," their belief in themselves, their personal right to their credit (the vain races belong to this group); the others want the reverse: they don't wish to be responsible for or guilty of anything, and demand, out of an inner self-contempt, that they can shift blame for themselves somewhere else. People in this second group, when they write books, are in the habit nowadays of taking up the cause of criminals; a sort of socialist pity is their most attractive disguise. And in fact, the fatalism of those with weak wills brightens up amazingly when it learns how to present itself as "la religion de la souffrance humaine" [the religion of human suffering] - that's its "good taste."

2/2

Anonymous Sat Feb 12 20:50:22 2022 No.19914789

>>19914223
>>19914228
Oh gosh, there is nothing to soesk about here, he is being entirely superficial, far more political and sociological then philosophical and scientific, and we must presume he would be proud of that.

>>19914017
>Here is the proof of free will--you are all free to leave.

This anon made me think of this good example. You are in your house right now. You can stay inside (a number of different things you can do) or go outside (a number of different things you can do).

Is an individual that says to themselves, I will (wink wink) leave the house, excersizing free will?

I came to this conclusion possibly being key in the free will topic a few years ago when I tried to wrap my head around it; that free will is possible presiscely by absence of reason.

If reason is cause and effect; the reason domino B falls when I knock over domino A is because mass and gravity and transfer of energy when they touch and conservation of energy and momentum etc. (Me getting all those correct is not the important part of this)...

But because the mind is a realm zone where internal perceptions and thoughts are not 1:1 of matter and physics, they escape natural physics law, by operating in a fuzzy symbolic logic of many facets contributing many datas at once, producing that which is known as conciousness, and the awareness aware of it's awareness, the will.

This will, unforced, un determined by the laws of physics, for no physically nessescary reason, aware of inside, aware of outside, wills itself, to go out side.

Matter and energy escape brute determinism, by seeing matter and energy and law outside of it's confines, and says to itself, I wi touch that, I will touch that, I will go outside. It is in complete control of it's bodies movements. The wind the determines the tree leaves swaying does not blow inside the mind: the mind is a fortress against the energy and matter outside itself that is brutally determined, the water evaporating is determined, the water fall, the grass growing is determined, energy matter and it's rules of action, outside the head, outside the head energy and matter and it's rules, do not determine if the wi is forced to go outside or stay inside right this moment.

For any reason or no reason, good reason, bad reason, faulty reason, fuzzy reason, none of it matters, ultimately the will is aware it can go out or stay in, it is purely a self force, in an instant or after 19 instances it may declare like nietsche, I will go out! Or, I will stay in!

The matter and energy is at relative rest, ah the other clue!! It is accessing potential! It accesses potential energy, potential future states and it can pick which future state it wants.

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 13 02:53:20 2022 No.19916045 Op where you at mate

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 13 03:41:47 2022 No.19916150 >>19897047 Marry the mango, fuck the watermelon, KILL the pear.

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 13 10:07:13 2022 No.19917413 >>19916150 Nah you trippin, all those fruits are delectable. Only the kiwi and pineapple can at times and places be too sour sweet, I ate kiwi as a kid and loved it, but now it may be too much

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 13 10:58:00 2022 No.19917585 >>19914789 >he is being entirely superficial How do you figure?

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 12:40:48 2022 No.19918027

>>19917585
He is likely out of sheer unfaultable ignorance, ignoring the hard problem of conciousness and how it is the crux of understanding the meaning and possibilities of the term 'free-will' scientifically.

If you insist, I will read through that passage again and quote and resond to it my thinking.

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 13:01:21 2022 No.19918131

>>19917585
>The causa sui [something being its own cause] is the best self-contradiction which has been thought up so far, a kind of logical rape and perversity. But the excessive pride of human beings has worked to entangle itself deeply and terribly with this very nonsense.
>The demand for "freedom of the will," in that superlative metaphysical sense, as it unfortunately still rules in the heads of the half-educated, the demand to bear the entire final responsibility for one's actions oneself and to relieve God, the world, ancestors, chance, and society of responsibility for it, is naturally nothing less than this very causa sui and an attempt to pull oneself into existence out of the swamp of nothingness by the hair, with more audacity than Munchhausen.

Soooooo. I think he is messed up here. There is the determinism outside the individual, inside the individuals body, of the brain, of the mind. So there is complete pure absolute causal determinism from the stars to the planets to the elements, to chemical reactions etc. So is there anything to talk about.... There seems to be . ... There seems to be the apparent ability for a concious observer to be it's own cause, to control it's own causal pathways.

Notice the words he uses, "to bear the Final Responsibility'; this is an ambiguous statement, I had to just look back and he actually throws in the word 'Entire' before final, for good measure:

Do you see his distinction at least thus far is a matter of degrees, of duality absolutes: either entire responsibilty, or entirely no responsibility; wherin anyone familiar with this topic would know that the former has never honestly been argued for the facts that obviously much of life contains determinisms. Must I even keep going? I will copy the rest of his blurb and respond to it in a new post if it determines in me worthy warrenting of doing so.

Also this is not an entire proof of anything, but notice all the adhominems in your quoted paragraphs, one uses excessive ad hominems when they are certain they are right, or believe they are certainly right or if there may be the slightest doubt they may be in over their head and trying to brute their way through , or unsure they don't fully grasp the content they are discussing, instinctually defensively puff themselves up as motivation to continue regardless, or rhetorically emotionally convince their on the fence reader.

All that aside I will see if there is anything worth responding to in what's left.

Though I did already post in the thread response to what I perceived to be the essence of his concern over this issue, his will to power stuff, though instead of merely considering the will to power as a complete and total object in and of itself as an end or ends or means, or crown ultimate only principle, I went the steps further in considering the possible consequences of it's universal implementation.

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 13:13:11 2022 No.19918183

>>19918027
>ignoring the hard problem of conciousness and how it is the crux of understanding the meaning and possibilities of the term 'free-will' scientifically.
Though at the same time, as I was trying to do with my ramblings itt is surround the issue from all sides, as myself, awareness, conciousness, it's nature, it's structure, mechanisms to try to shed light on its fundamental possibilities from a 'being it' perspective to see if that might get us anywhere in further approaching and considering the fundamentals of the nature of the queries and problem.

There is s fish we ate trying to catch, and we hardly know what it looks like, we must design all possible nets and concieve of all possible reeling techniques. Sometimes we relatively blindly stab in the dark, at the hope of coming up with a drop of blood or a scale to analyze and study. But hopefully too it is all relatively educated guessing. We are aiming towards areas, we think the answer may be hiding.

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 13:30:54 2022 No.19918282

>>19917585
People should not mistakenly reify "cause" and "effect" the way those investigating nature do (and people like them who nowadays naturalize their thinking), in accordance with the ruling mechanistic foolishness which allows causes to push and shove until they "have an effect."

Ok his concern here is political and sociological, for people In relative power to selectively choose which causes to focus on, thus promoting causes that generate effects, and the public thinking this is purely natural determinism, so the power dynamic of power using it's free will to produce causes and effects that the rest of society percieve as inevitable. Simply because, there was a cause, and there was an effect, and they tend to not fully or further investigate the nature of the source of that first cause. Nieyszche cared about the well being of his fellow man, he was attempting to be a preacher in the cult of true social intelligence.
>People should use "cause" and "effect" merely as pure ideas, that is, as conventional fictions to indicate and communicate, not as an explanation. In the "in itself" there is no "causal connection," no "necessity," no "psychological unfreedom," no "effect following from the cause"; no "law" holds sway. We are the ones who have, on our own, made up causes, causal sequences, for-one-another, relativity, compulsion, number, law, freedom, reason, and purpose, and when we fabricate this world of signs inside things as something "in itself," when we stir it into things, then we're once again acting as we have always done, namely, mythologically.

This is where he loses me a bit or completely, or maybe it's just obvious to our time or at least an adult of my intelligence, he is just talking about freedom in general it seems, society is this way, it could possible be this other way or this other way.

>The "unfree will" is a myth: in real life it's merely a matter of strong and weak wills.
Ok. So he is commenting essentially on for example a farmer born in the 1800s may think, 'im born a farmer, I'm a farmer, there's nothing more to it' that that will did in fact have the potential freedom, if it exsersized it's power, to drop it's hoe and take a horse to Paris looking for work.

So neetch in the first part seemed to call out the absurdity of will being entirely free, obviously, and now saying there is no such thing as 'unfree will'

Which I geuss lands him for what I thought he was missing, somewhere in between; but the oscillation between the two poles seems to intensify the more one zooms in, which leads some people to declare there can be no such thing as free will in any sense of any kind. Which is the notion I was responding to, because the scientific mechanistic chemical electric world body brain mind mysteries are a fascinating puzzle that appears to have this conclusion difficult to prove.

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 14:04:36 2022 No.19918421

(1/2)
>>19918183
>We are aiming towards areas, we think the answer may be hiding.
This also has to do with the nature of free will, how the term great attractor is used. There is this push and pull of the future and present, of setting a future goal, compelled by the past, and then analyzing paths to get there. The future will occur, rocks don't know this, Man does. The notion of free will at all has to do with; how can a mechanism cause itself to choose a future out of many. If it has no basis by which to do this, one might say it is random, and if the will makes a random choice, what were the underlying physical determinations that resulted in the precise choice made. .

For instance flipping a coin is not random, there are precise physical laws surrounding every aspect of the coin flip process, which in real time physically energetically causally play out.

A person places the coin on their thumb, what detetmined they place it exactly where they did, again did they will it in that spot or was it random, what determines the force of which they flick it, flick it softly, medium, hard, what reasons would justify then choosing either, how high do they lift their whole hand when they flick, and all what velocity do they raise it, did they choose to flick it onto carpet or hard floor, what detetmines whether or not they do the extra turn over onto back of wrist.

All these degrees of free wills and randoms going into simply the production of a "random" act.

If the will makes a random choice, i.e. to go left,right, or straight down equally appearing paths while walking in the woods with no map or destination or knowledge of area, If it randomly chooses right for example, why exactly did it not choose left or center. Must there be ultimately some physical chain reaction of causes and thought process that ultimately settled on right,

It sees left, center, right, and without thought on a whim says to itself, right.

Why? Does it have a previously established bias to moving to the right? Did it happen to approach the trail on the right side, and so this type of person, determined and otherwise over the course of their lives, prefers to go with this flow and just keep going quick distance A to B, whereas another individual may say, I've been walking on this right side, maybe the experience will be different if I cross over and take that left path. And maybe these choices would be different on different days for different reasons.

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 14:08:02 2022 No.19918440

>>19918183
(2/2)
But the person approaching the three paths, states them in it's head, left, center, right, and if randomly concludes; right, giving it little thought, it can only choose one, it might as well be left, it might as well be right, it might as well be center, but to in an instant for no reason, to say right; what ultimately was the cause of that desecion; the ultimate forcing cause of all desiscions is that a desiscion must be made, and not making a descion is making the descion to not make a descision.
But being aware they could go left or center, what was the process of thought, physically mechanically imaginationarily how was it concluded to not go left or right.

when presented with random options perhaps the will is most free, I tried to express on an earlier post, equally reasonable options the will is all alone with itself purely free to stand up and of it's own accord and doing declare a choice.

Once the will is aware of all options, it is truly free to say: that one; Because. Be Cause. Be Cause I Said So.

But seeing the three equal options, the individual is ultimately causing the descion to be made.

Is there not randomness, but more and less order; is there not free will; but more and less determinism.

The precise problem is the intriguing enough complaint fir me to make all these responses of those who say; there can not be anything more or less than determinism.

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 14:37:30 2022 No.19918581

>>19918183
>We are aiming towards areas, we think the answer may be hiding.
>>19918421
I started that post to touch upon this but never fully got there I don't think or maybe I did say what I thought about that; the idea of goals, purposes; the relative nature or them being determined and not, and by one projecting into the future to make a goal, one ceases some anxiety and uncertainty regarding their freedom, and limits themselves to a path, which has their freedoms and choices along the way, but none as so large as the many possible paths of life.

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 15:12:42 2022 No.19918743

(1/2)
>>19918440
>The precise problem is the intriguing enough complaint fir me to make all these responses of those who say; there can not be anything more or less than determinism.

And if it were possible for something in the head which we call; conciousness, awareness, will; to exist, and escape the cause and effect relation between all matter and energy of the universe; how and in what ways is it doing this; what is going on here;

It seems after taking in a sufficient amount of imagery/object/sensorial/physical data along with it's relational metaphysical/intellectual/informational/physical law data; the will is in charge, to if it's own accords and fancies, aware of all determinisms; in it's head Halting the ceasesless cascade, halting Newton's cradle, and saying, I, I, I, I, I am, and I want to see this occur because I want to. Precisely a tautology as Op suggested, but op seemed to allude to thinking tautalogies are auto invalid or paradoxes, I don't see a reason to conclude that nessecarily.

The brain mind body conciousness system, developed an internal echo chamber, where it can escape the constant avalanche of external reality, and visualize projections of the future, where it can formulate tautalogies for itself and press enter activate send engage action do it. It realized it's freedom to analyze and choose among it's projections so it freely chooses among them, it knows some choices may be weighed by determining factors but it re cognizes that It could choose the other choices if it wanted to, if it wanted to, it knows it can, If it wants to, but where does the wanting to do this or that ultimately come from. From the will simply realizing that it can choose. That in order for the activity following a choice to be done the will must produce that activity.

Eman Nep Sun Feb 13 15:13:58 2022 No.19918752

2/2
>>19918743
That in order for the activity following a choice to be done the will must produce that activity. The will knows it can pick up that rock and throw it, try to hit this tree or that tree, or it can touch a leaf or rip it off or pick up a stick and bend it or break it or hit it against a tree and or log; but from where would come the want to do this. Why not is as good as why it seems; where what is possible meets why not comes freedom for the will to exert itself, but is it always for something, for fun, for relieving stress, for distraction, for easing boredom; do these things determine an action must take place; yes but what action, is the wills freedom.

The will is walking; I want to pick up the rock and that stick; why?
I want to.
Why?
I don't know... Or I do know.... I want to
Why do you want to?
Well I know I can, and why shouldnt I?
Well why should you?
Why shouldn't I?
Why should you?
I can, and I Will.
Ok...but why?
Because
Why?
Because I can?
There are many things you can do and you don't do them all, why right now this one?
Because why not, I could, I could not, why not just do it, I wanted to,
Why did you want to?
Why would I not have wanted to?
Because there is no need or purpose, it makes no sense
So what, it is fun, it feels good to hold material in the hand, and try to hit things
Aha! So there is a reason and goal!
Yes, you got me, I was determined by fun, pleasure and alleviating boredom

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 15:39:20 2022 No.19918897

>>19914228
So to summerize the first paragraph; obviously people are not absolutely free from all worldly causes; but people are not absolutely cogs in machines with 0 degrees of internally willed freedom. He concludes; string wills generate of themselves more freedom (we presume if that is what they want) while weaker wills cower back from their powers to be free.

So in the state of the art contemporary conversation, he believes in some sense that Free will exists.

>It is almost always already a symptom of something lacking in a thinker himself when he senses in all "causal connections" and "psychological necessity" some purpose, necessity, inevitable consequence, pressure, and unfreedom. That very feeling is a telltale give away - the person is betraying himself. And if I have seen things correctly, the "unfreedom of the will" has generally been seen as a problem from two totally contrasting points of view, but always in a deeply personal way:

Ok so, people latch onto goals, purposes beliefs, and the latch onto causal chains of means which they believe will reach those goals, this making them unfree slaves to those goals and means where really they have the freedom to say fuck it.

So personally to be a bit crude and smarmy this could possibly read like a 17 year old video game player looking out his window at a middle age woman spending an hour handing out socks to homeless people, and young Nietszche saying 'heh, what a stupid slave', it is possible they are both correct, the woman feels compelled to help someone in need, nietszhe perhaps prefers if people suffering are not helped. At least it's greater freedom for him, is the point, and only an individuals freedom is of any importance. It seems to him.

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 15:49:00 2022 No.19918955

>>19896518
well, it's a nonsense concept, but it's important psychologically speaking. there's empirical evidence for locus of control and internal/external attribution styles. if you believe in luck/fate/superstition then you're basically giving up a portion of your free will

inversely, look at the studies on self-efficacy. you can achieve a lot with proper goal setting and an internal attribution style. all this philosophizing and tautology is wasting time

Anonymous Sun Feb 13 15:58:14 2022 No.19919012
File: 660 KB, 207x207, gd.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>19898111
Dude, are you honestly this fucking stupid or are you just pretending like you don't understand?

If this is truly beyond the realm of your understanding, there is a plethora of scientific studies and papers at your disposal on google. If you you need your hand held this much you're probably just too fucking dumb and dense and you'd be better off going back to your favorite anime or rpg vidya game and not worrying about all of this fancy made-up science stuff.

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 13 18:01:14 2022 No.19919645 O op O op where art thou, respond to my posts, determine your input into my path so I may respond with my putout

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 13 21:30:59 2022 No.19920477 O where o where is my little op O where o where can he be

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 13 22:26:09 2022 No.19920671 I'm not reading all that shit.

>>	Anonymous Sun Feb 13 23:36:14 2022 No.19920972 yep probably for the best, was fun while it lasted. Any other philosophy mysteries or quandaries or uncertainties I can try to look into and elucidate?

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 14 00:43:53 2022 No.19921308 >>19920972 Maybe tommorow, maybe tomorrow

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature