|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 10, 2015 6:09:00 GMT -5
Your crusade against volition contradicts itself, you apply your will to manage the agenda you've choosen, and you conspire to advance an agenda by the force of your will.. the war you wage against volition/separation depends on you creating the illusion of an enemy.. Even if that were true, it wouldn't contradict nonvolition. You have yet to understand the concept, much less realize the truth of it. From Wikipedia: It's easy to dismiss someone else's understanding of your specialized use of language.. come to the discussion empty, willing to let your attachments to truths be suspended for an interval of liberated awareness.. give your beliefs the opportunity to reaffirm their veracity, or... the opportunity to expand your understanding..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 10, 2015 6:25:48 GMT -5
Your crusade against volition contradicts itself, you apply your will to manage the agenda you've choosen, and you conspire to advance an agenda by the force of your will.. the war you wage against volition/separation depends on you creating the illusion of an enemy.. Repost of something you may have seen. It is not about realization per se, but it might help relax your stance. It is useful to realize that consciousness is not divided, other than by the experiencer's choices to categorize it as such.. the imagined difference between consciousness and 'subconsciousness' is a function of the experiencer's desire to have a strawman for creating the illusions of their beliefs, kinda like 'ego'.. that video is an if/then theory about patterns in a brain scan, what is happening is conditioning activating to influence the decision, the decision can go in any direction.. notice that the test is not shown in its entirety, exposing the types of questions that set-up the decisions.. the process is suspect in that it is looking 'for' something..
|
|
|
Post by zin on Feb 10, 2015 6:49:27 GMT -5
He didn't say HE wasn't allowed to guess. This is true. To be honest, I'm waiting for Stevie to try out his guessing on at least the next four new members. I liked the astronaut avatar .. I was going to put a rooster pic that I took but then chose this one.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 10, 2015 10:51:07 GMT -5
Even if that were true, it wouldn't contradict nonvolition. You have yet to understand the concept, much less realize the truth of it. From Wikipedia: It's easy to dismiss someone else's understanding of your specialized use of language.. come to the discussion empty, willing to let your attachments to truths be suspended for an interval of liberated awareness.. give your beliefs the opportunity to reaffirm their veracity, or... the opportunity to expand your understanding.. So not only do you not understand the implications of no volition, you don't even understand what we mean when we talk about it in the context of these discussions. Further, you don't want to know, you just want to spit.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 10, 2015 10:57:07 GMT -5
Repost of something you may have seen. It is not about realization per se, but it might help relax your stance. It is useful to realize that consciousness is not divided, other than by the experiencer's choices to categorize it as such.. the imagined difference between consciousness and 'subconsciousness' is a function of the experiencer's desire to have a strawman for creating the illusions of their beliefs, kinda like 'ego'.. that video is an if/then theory about patterns in a brain scan, what is happening is conditioning activating to influence the decision, the decision can go in any direction.. notice that the test is not shown in its entirety, exposing the types of questions that set-up the decisions.. the process is suspect in that it is looking 'for' something.. Yes, they're looking for the truth as opposed to justification for their beliefs and preferences.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 10, 2015 11:19:35 GMT -5
He didn't say HE wasn't allowed to guess. This is true. To be honest, I'm waiting for Stevie to try out his guessing on at least the next four new members. I'm sure there's several of us that miss Q'.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 10, 2015 11:24:05 GMT -5
From Wikipedia: It's easy to dismiss someone else's understanding of your specialized use of language.. come to the discussion empty, willing to let your attachments to truths be suspended for an interval of liberated awareness.. give your beliefs the opportunity to reaffirm their veracity, or... the opportunity to expand your understanding.. So not only do you not understand the implications of no volition, you don't even understand what we mean when we talk about it in the context of these discussions. Further, you don't want to know, you j ust want to spit. In one post there's the accusation that you're on a crusade and then, in the very next post, there's a call for you to come empty. I'm wonderin' now if the rastaphant's supply of blank stare is limitless??
|
|
|
Post by silver on Feb 10, 2015 12:15:09 GMT -5
Rastaphant needs a supply of Visine for stuffed animules pehaps.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 13:31:33 GMT -5
Even if that were true, it wouldn't contradict nonvolition. You have yet to understand the concept, much less realize the truth of it. From Wikipedia: It's easy to dismiss someone else's understanding of your specialized use of language.. come to the discussion empty, willing to let your attachments to truths be suspended for an interval of liberated awareness.. give your beliefs the opportunity to reaffirm their veracity, or... the opportunity to expand your understanding.. Is there a reason you chose the wikipedia subdefinitions as used in the professions of psychology and linguistics? If it just means 'the process of making and acting on decisions' it is too mushy to be used in this debate. Someone who thinks that volition is a mental illusion could also agree with that definition, for example. At dictionary.com it says this about volition: The latin root for volition is will. Given that definition, a lot rests on the meaning of will. It's also a bit mushy, in that the phenomenon of 'will' could be seen as an appearance, as illusory. IOW, there's will to make a decision, but that will might be just an epiphenomenon of overall conditioning. The term 'free will' ups the anti a little bit, underscoring the aspect of will at the center of the debate. This is a will that is free or independent of all context and conditioning. The free will at the center of the process of decision making comes 'out of nowhere' (or insert_theological_or_philosophical_theory).
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 10, 2015 14:11:01 GMT -5
From Wikipedia: It's easy to dismiss someone else's understanding of your specialized use of language.. come to the discussion empty, willing to let your attachments to truths be suspended for an interval of liberated awareness.. give your beliefs the opportunity to reaffirm their veracity, or... the opportunity to expand your understanding.. Is there a reason you chose the wikipedia subdefinitions as used in the professions of psychology and linguistics? If it just means 'the process of making and acting on decisions' it is too mushy to be used in this debate. Someone who thinks that volition is a mental illusion could also agree with that definition, for example. At dictionary.com it says this about volition: The latin root for volition is will. Given that definition, a lot rests on the meaning of will. It's also a bit mushy, in that the phenomenon of 'will' could be seen as an appearance, as illusory. IOW, there's will to make a decision, but that will might be just an epiphenomenon of overall conditioning. The term 'free will' ups the anti a little bit, underscoring the aspect of will at the center of the debate. This is a will that is free or independent of all context and conditioning. The free will at the center of the process of decision making comes 'out of nowhere' (or insert_theological_or_philosophical_theory). As dictionary's and encyclopedia's can only ever take one idea as input and deliver multiple ideas as output, isn't resorting to them for a definition like exactly the opposite process of regarding what is with a still mind?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 14:28:55 GMT -5
Is there a reason you chose the wikipedia subdefinitions as used in the professions of psychology and linguistics? If it just means 'the process of making and acting on decisions' it is too mushy to be used in this debate. Someone who thinks that volition is a mental illusion could also agree with that definition, for example. At dictionary.com it says this about volition: The latin root for volition is will. Given that definition, a lot rests on the meaning of will. It's also a bit mushy, in that the phenomenon of 'will' could be seen as an appearance, as illusory. IOW, there's will to make a decision, but that will might be just an epiphenomenon of overall conditioning. The term 'free will' ups the anti a little bit, underscoring the aspect of will at the center of the debate. This is a will that is free or independent of all context and conditioning. The free will at the center of the process of decision making comes 'out of nowhere' (or insert_theological_or_philosophical_theory). As dictionary's and encyclopedia's can only ever take one idea as input and deliver multiple ideas as output, isn't resorting to them for a definition like exactly the opposite process of regarding what is with a still mind? Yes. And I agree that still mind is the best place to be when coming up with first hand observations of volition/free will. However, since Tzu perceives a war on volition and thinks its enemies employ trickery in the form of changing its meaning, I give him the benefit of the doubt that he is just trying to come up with a common understanding of the term. I just don't think the wikipedia entry for the fields of psychology and linguistics are very common or useful. Dictionary.com is maybe marginally better, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 10, 2015 14:34:11 GMT -5
As dictionary's and encyclopedia's can only ever take one idea as input and deliver multiple ideas as output, isn't resorting to them for a definition like exactly the opposite process of regarding what is with a still mind? Yes. And I agree that still mind is the best place to be when coming up with first hand observations of volition/free will. However, since Tzu perceives a war on volition and thinks its enemies employ trickery in the form of changing its meaning, I give him the benefit of the doubt that he is just trying to come up with a common understanding of the term. I just don't think the wikipedia entry for the fields of psychology and linguistics are very common or useful. Dictionary.com is maybe marginally better, IMHO. I propose an alternate spelling of dictionary that involves the addition of the letter k!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 15:08:50 GMT -5
Yes. And I agree that still mind is the best place to be when coming up with first hand observations of volition/free will. However, since Tzu perceives a war on volition and thinks its enemies employ trickery in the form of changing its meaning, I give him the benefit of the doubt that he is just trying to come up with a common understanding of the term. I just don't think the wikipedia entry for the fields of psychology and linguistics are very common or useful. Dictionary.com is maybe marginally better, IMHO. I propose an alternate spelling of dictionary that involves the addition of the letter k! voliktion noun 1. the little voice in one's head that sounds like Gilbert Gottfried,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 16:07:40 GMT -5
This is true. To be honest, I'm waiting for Stevie to try out his guessing on at least the next four new members. I liked the astronaut avatar .. I was going to put a rooster pic that I took but then chose this one. Thanx .. do you know the name of the plant against the wall outside your window?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 16:09:41 GMT -5
This is true. To be honest, I'm waiting for Stevie to try out his guessing on at least the next four new members. I'm sure there's several of us that miss Q'. Yeah. I hope he's ok, and has taken to smiling more than is comfortable.
|
|