A different look at freewill

a reply to: Mantiss2021

" The zone " is similar to what is being described in the OP, in that the outside world is sorta sidestepped.

The Hockey-player making a brilliant end-to-end rush, is also absent of the programmed mind.
They are going-on pure instinct and intuition.

Imagine a similar state, but we are able to sit there, in that moment, and ponder.
No outside world.
No Hockey game.
No motorcycle being tuned.

In that moment : we see all of the stories, that society speaks about, and we brush them aside.
Programmed and automated thoughts pop, and we gently let them breeze through the space, with no stickiness.
Then we are unencumbered, to let Love flow through us.

We can sit there, and view all of these elements.

You're right : it is a challenge discussing that which is beyond words, but here we are ! LoL !!

a reply to: Astyanax

There is the kind of instinct, that may send one running into a burning building, to rescue a soul in need.

Let's imagine a different situation, where we can sit in silence, and ponder a question, or perhaps a potential decision.
A place where we have time, to feel that instinct, but just observe it, without acting on it.

If we have time to observe that instinct, we can roll it over, and examine it to see if there are any influences involved.
Pause in the moment.
A naked moment, free from programming and other stuff.

In that moment : let us look for all of the different ways that the question could be answered, or how the potential decision may be made.

Let's strip-away all of the stories, and find what an answer flowing from pure Love might look like.

Once we have pondered all of this, and are ready to bring this question, or decision, to act somehow in the outside world.
At that moment : we have the choice.
Love, or not-Love.

Freewill, uhmm, if you will ... LoL !!

Sorry if it all sounds convoluted, because it's rather simple in reality.
The process may happen in a few seconds sometimes, after it has been used for a while.

Yet it is not easy, and I'm no master.
My ego is still strong, and often is the first wave that pops, in many situations.
But I have learned that if I wait a couple of seconds, the energy from the ego-burst begins to subside, and when I can observe it, then I can work around it.

I suspect more have had this experience without contemplating what it really was.

Let Love ne with U.

a reply to: Lumenari

Yes Lum !
I'm happy to see that you have also done the gymnastics, of flipping ideas around.
Oh so many of the concepts of man, can be dismantled, layer by layer, or maybe sometimes smashed.

When we fixate on only the differences : there is argument and conflict.
Looking for commonalities, dulls the edges on the previously cutting differences.

The unfortunate blind men, lacked the wisdom see beyond their own opinions.
The observer with vision, can see that.

Let us also observe our own opinions, beliefs, and influences, and then also be second observer, that sees through them all.
If we can sit in that place of freedom from programming and whatever, that is the space in which our freewill.

I don't mean to state that as a matter of objective fact. It's not.
It's my subjective truth, for now.

I'm happy that you, and other commentators, are able to get the vibe, even though it is very difficult to put into words.

Love and peace.

a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin


Ummm...when the will is constrained...then it is neither free nor will...it is merely rote behavior supplanting will that will remains constrained within the law...

This is imposition...

Imposed constraints on behavior supplant freedom and will with a One size fits all normative behavior model...Our freedom to act and behave as we see fit is channeled and shaped by societal constraint...

Humans undergo a constant process of having their malleable...self...shaped and conformed to moral relativism...

NOTHING...you do...or think...or dream...is remotely original...

We have all been you...before...








YouSir

a reply to: RAY1990

Hey Ray.

I'm interested in the part of the message, that may resonate a little vibe, deep-down.
The messengers are not interesting to me.

It's interesting that our experiences with oneness differ.
Let's build a bridge.
For me : oneness is that place/state, where the outside world has melted-away, and nothing is left but awareness, Love, creativity, and freewill.
The ideas and concepts of the outside world may still be there, but a bright light is shone on them, until it is seen that they are inconsequential in this experience.

Ya got any leftover boards, or bricks, to help build that bridge ?

a reply to: Lumenari

Then the more I thought about it, the more I realized that you really don't understand the concept of Christianity at all.

Don't confuse the Bible, especially the Old Testament, with Christianity.

There is no Christian anywhere on this earth that thinks that God is the God of the old Testament.

That's just flat out false. I know that from experience, having grown up in a "born again" evangelical household and Pentecostal Church.

Beginning in the Garden of Eden in which God creates Adam and Eve with the ability to obey or disobey him

Adam and Eve were created "in their image". Their ability to "disobey" their gods was bug, not a feature that the guy flying around in pillar of fire, throwing fireballs at Sodom and Gomorrah, and dispensing "Thou Shall NOT" commandments seemed to be very displeased with.

If enough people think something exists, it exists.

Uhmmm, No. That's called mass delusion.

a reply to: YouSir

He-he-he, thanks for reminding me, uhmm, us.

I agree that it may all be my own ego, outfoxing my heart once again.
It may be some deep programming within a sim, that is beyond my comprehension.
It may be some kind of deep genetic programming, or whatever learned mechanism.

Since we can see some of it, we should not assume that we see it all.

Perhaps all we can do is minimize the parts we do perceive, and then that's what my whole idea is about ?

a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

I use the label "Fathers love" for the Christians in ATS. There appears no separation in that reality so labels are non-sensible. I have entered the realm in which nothing exist but emptiness. Which I believe to be the unmanifested itself. When exiting that realm one is immersed in a euphoria of immense love that seems to last for an hour or so.

The creative energy you speak off comes from the universe itself. When the segmentation between our local ego-mind and the universal mind weakens. The universal mind (144,000) awakens in us.

"experiential point of view" ... Do so with all your might.

Love.

a reply to: RAY1990

That said we're not monkeys and things like communication and morality changes things.

Well, my point is that communication (through speech, song and writing) and prescriptive morality are evolved features of Homo Sapiens. But though the former is unique to us, morality most certainly is not. All social animals display it, though their ideas of good and bad behaviour may be very different from ours. Dolphins are exquisitely sociable and demonstrably moral animals for whom rape is perfectly normal and natural. Consensual sex apparently does not exist in their world.

The thing is though most modern morality is invented, laws are often built around morality yet I can imagine a person who lives under common law could find himself in trouble within a different nation that also follows a common law system, there's not exactly a set pattern for social instincts.

Yes, ‘modern morality’ is invented. This cultural elaboration is possible bacause the promptings of instinct are always naturally modulated by history and circumstances. This is true in all higher animals at least. To find true automatism, you would have to look at ants, perhaps, or termites.

What you’re calling ‘modern morality’ is what philosophers call ‘prescriptive morality’. It is imposed on social groups by the highest-status individuals in the group, to maintain social order in their interest. Prescriptive moralities, unlike ethical systems that provide us with philosophical tools to help us judge the morality of our actions, are invented to prevent us expressing our instincts ⎻ selfish or social ⎻ in behaviour that is disruptive to the status quo. They pervert our instinctive feelings of guilt, status, altruism ⎻ the real springs of moral behaviour ⎻ to achieve their object, and in the final analysis they may not be ethically acceptable at all.

The absence of free will is not automatism. Your difficulty seems to arise from equating the two. Free will may be just a perception we have, but that does not make us unthinking automatons. We respond to stimuli in the environment, but we do so unpredictably ⎻ proactively and creatively. Nor do we always follow the prescriptive moralities of our various cultures (and yes, you are right, these do differ from culture to culture, not because they originate in anything other than instinct but because external conditions and desired outcomes vary from culture to culture and dominant group to dominant group).

Idk... Just seems off to say we've got our base instincts and our social instincts and they're at odds with each other.

That is, however, what I’m saying, and I wonder why, apart from its unfamiliarity, the idea seems off to you. All higher social species experience conflicts of conscience. Have you heard of Hamilton’s Rule? It’s the tension between selfish and social instincts given mathematical form, and although the idea has its flaws, it is still enormously useful as a conceptual tool.

The latter would be a construct and non existent without some form of educating right?

No education necessary, just coercion. The rulers and their cronies say what morality is, and everyone is forced to obey. Very different from natural, instinctive morality.

Please ask more questions if the foregoing is not clear. These are not easy ideas to grasp, or to explain.

a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

I'm interested in the part of the message, that may resonate a little vibe, deep-down.
The messengers are not interesting to me.

That divine spark needn't be communicated, it's within the animate wherever you find them. My own realisation was probably based around a concept that needn't be fleshed out within the realms of human thought. Sovereignty.

I may or may not have had experience with oneness, I guess ultimately it depends what one is paired with, I couldn't think of the source but to pair with say a juvenile bird or an untrained first responder on the scene would be unpleasant to say the least.

For me : oneness is that place/state, where the outside world has melted-away, and nothing is left but awareness, Love, creativity, and freewill.
The ideas and concepts of the outside world may still be there, but a bright light is shone on them, until it is seen that they are inconsequential in this experience.

Oneness for me is a disregard of sovereignty and the discarding of ego. I understand that nature doesn't like vacuums (it's why she's down here in earth) so I have to consider what the end game would be. I suspect the default nature of reality would switch from a competitive one to a one of conflict. We don't really have hive minds or oneness on earth yet but we're certainly approaching the ability via technology... Just saying, if the big gal doesn't do it I wonder if we should.

Ya got any leftover boards, or bricks, to help build that bridge ?

Meeting halfway would be the way to go. We'd both be strangers on a foreign land any other way. We can learn to build bricks and boards but could you construct your half without ever touching the water?

There's a cost to such projects, the clay for the bricks took lifetimes and so did the wood for the boards, the bridge itself will leave an indelible mark on the landscape and I'd bet there's costs beyond that too. I question the cost when the river already had shallows that run slow.

Honestly?

All things considered the only superceder of sovereignty I see is death, cheating is just bad form which would be the complete opposite of "the way" you were speaking of with Mantiss2021.

a reply to: Astyanax

No education necessary, just coercion. The rulers and their cronies say what morality is, and everyone is forced to obey. Very different from natural, instinctive morality.

Please ask more questions if the foregoing is not clear. These are not easy ideas to grasp, or to explain.

Again poor choice of words on my part although that's not exactly different from training a dog, I've had migraines over the last couple weeks which seems to mess up my communication skills.

Most of it was clear and I do have questions I will reply half decently when I get the chance, good reply

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: YouSir


Since we can see some of it, we should not assume that we see it all.

Ummm...it really doesn't matter which hem of the fractal you happen to observe...


"We all float down here...Georgie"







YouSir

a reply to: glend

Thank-you for sharing your wisdom Good-Glend.

Do so with all your might.

Do we even have the choice my friend ?

a reply to: RAY1990

poor choice of words on my part

You weren’t the only one...

Astyanax: This cultural elaboration is possible because the promptings of instinct are always naturally modulated by history and circumstances.

I should have written, ‘This cultural elaboration is possible because the promptings of instinct are always naturally modulated by an individual’s history and circumstances.’ And their genes, too, obviously, though it seemed unnecessary to mention that, it being understood when we speak of instinct.

a reply to: RAY1990

It's in the moments we ponder, we weigh : how shall I react.

I'm glad you have investigated the interior Sovereign.

Can I feel the vibe of the self-serving, arrogant Sovereign, and can I also feel the vibe of the the benevolent Sovereign ?

This is how the good king knows he is making the right choice : or at least not the worst choice.

By seeing the polar opposite, it's easier to find the centre, and then choose, with our deep-down, unassailable sovereignty, what is best for all.

Again : the words are not the thing, but they are useful as pointers.

Let Love be with U.

a reply to: YouSir

Are we just fooling ourselves when we think we make a choice ?
Is it all just farts in the wind ?

I'd like to share a really simple example, of what I was trying to articulate with the OP.
YouSir, or any one reading, are welcomed to reply, but don't have-to, of course.

There is an unwritten, golden rule about snow-shoveling : never shovel the snow into a place where some other person will need to shovel it again. ( Therein never encumbering another to work more than needed. )

My car is parked in back of our apartment building, where there are 5 parking spaces, and we all have our own space.
The man parked next to me, had been away for a few weeks, and so his car was buried in snow.

A couple of days ago, I go out to take my car, and notice that the neighbor has returned, and shoveled-out his car.
My car was clear the day before, but now, the neighbor had, in the process of clearing-out his car, caused a lot of snow to plie-up against the side of my car.

It was mild when he shoveled, but a crisp overnight had turned a lot of that snow into a crusty lump.
I had-to kick some aside just to be able to open my door.

It was turning in my thoughts : " how could he do that to me ? ", and other similar " poor-me " ideas.
But I had time to consider multiple potential reactions.
My thoughts were : this man is an immigrant from a warm country, and probably never learned the same lessons as me.
But he is younger, and in good shape, and me, well, getting older.

Had this on my mind, doing my errands.
Came home, and stopped the car in the middle of the lot, not in my parking-space.
I went-up to get my shovel, and back-down to start shoveling.

So : what to do ?
Confront him, and ask him to clean-up the mess ?
Shovel it all back into his parking space ?

Well : I just dug-in, broke the crusty snow into pieces, and shoveled it up onto the snowbank.
It was really crusty.
Got my car, and drove over it a few times.
Finished smoothing it all out, nice and clean.

Yes : did it with a smile on my face, and clarity in my heart.

Those are the moments, where we can choose, how to react.
I choose peace, Love, goodness, kindness.
I freeze the ideas that pop, that are about revenge, victimhood, or other kind of ego influences.
I see them, feel them, but do not act on them.

Kind of a dumb example, but sometimes simplicity works.

a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

I liked your reply after mine.

One of the most beautiful things I know is the choice to express kindness in the face of adversity, if free will doesn't exist at that place then it probably doesn't exist.

Sometimes we forget the basics, I know I do.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: YouSir


Yes : did it with a smile on my face, and clarity in my heart.

Ummm...You sure showed him...all while feeling positively good about it...

You took the path of least resistance like a beachhead...succumbed to the flight over fight mechanism like a Blue Footed Booby...then patted yourself on the head for being so thoroughly...Christ-like...

Are you quite sure that wasn't a...Cheshire smile...?



YouSir

I like the general trend of what you're trying to do, but I must explain something in response to the following quote from your OP:

Beyond the Golden-Rule, the teachings of great sages like Jesus, and the societal rules that man makes : there is something deep within us, that somehow tells us what is right, and what is wrong.

Now there is definitely a case for each of us knowing instinctively the Golden Rule - it is the voice of our conscience, the connection to the Spirit of God which is present in small measure within every human ever born. Ultimately our goal in life must be to get to know the Author of Life - the One who literally wrote the book on human morality, virtue, self-sacrifice & service to others.

What I must refer to in your quote is that you named Jesus as "a great sage". He was not a great sage - He was the incarnate Son of God, the Author of Life, through whom & for whom everything that was made, was made. CS Lewis once said that if you were to judge Jesus as merely a man, He would be a lunatic, based on what He would say to those who came to listen to Him, or to be healed by Him. He would either be a lunatic, or the very Devil himself. This is because He made bombastic claims, to be the One who had the authority to forgive all sins committed by any person alive, if they came to Him in repentance. He literally claimed to be God on more than one occasion. So He is either a lunatic, the Devil trying to mislead us, or, quite possibly, He is who He says He is:

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government will be upon His shoulders. And He will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish and sustain it with justice and righteousness from that time and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of Hosts will accomplish this.…

Isaiah 9: 6

As you can see, the claim regarding the nature & character of the One who was prophesied, who can be universally accepted as the Saviour of Mankind, is unequivocal. He is not a "great sage", He is in fact God.

Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and You have seen Abraham?” “Truly, truly, I tell you,” Jesus declared, “before Abraham was born, I am!” At this, they picked up stones to throw at Him. But Jesus was hidden and went out of the temple area.…

John 8: 58

Jesus claimed to be the timeless Lord of Creation - NOT a "great sage".

It is vital that people understand this. Make your choice:

He is either a lunatic, the Devil himself, or the Sovereign Lord of All, the Alpha & Omega, the Beginning & the End.


Blessings folks.

a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

There is an unwritten, golden rule about snow-shoveling : never shovel the snow into a place where some other person will need to shovel it again. ( Therein never encumbering another to work more than needed. )

There is in fact an additional WRITTEN rule:

And do this not only to please them while they are watching, but as servants of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve with good will, as to the Lord and not to men, because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.…

Ephesians 6:7

Essentially, when you work never work to please those who are watching you (your boss, etc) but instead, work as if you were working for the Lord, who is always able to see what you're doing, and to see what's going on in your heart. So serve with good will, with joy, out of love, out of loyalty, out of humility.

God rewards those who work in this way, no matter what their occupation, trade or profession. We are each accountable to God for the way in which we work, and if we do our work from a good heart, we will earn a reward at the proper time, just keep at it patiently, day after day, until the time God calls you to level up. That time will come, one way or another. Have faith & keep on trucking!

FITO.