It's time to wake up!

a reply to: daskakik

I didn't say science backed absolutely everything up because it doesn't deal with every area, but that doesn't mean it lacks logic.

Let's just forget about what I said in the past for now.

My point was that all we can experience is this moment and that cannot change. It is fixed, do you agree? Yes or no. Then I will also make some more after this when you answer. But we didn't need science to come to that logical conclusion did we?

originally posted by: Andy1144
My point was that all we can experience is this moment and that cannot change. It is fixed, do you agree? Yes or no.

Yes and everybody knows this.

a reply to: daskakik

Holy #! This goes on for how many pages?
Stuck in the pointless now? Lol! It is hilarious!
But do you still know what it is about?

Does it still have anything to do with the topic?

a reply to: daskakik

So that's a fixed law which will never change right? Another fixed rule, is that we will always make the decision which we perceive has the most pleasurable outcome. Yes or no?

originally posted by: Andy1144
So that's a fixed law which will never change right? Another fixed rule, is that we will always make the decision which we perceive has the most pleasurable outcome. Yes or no?

I don't know. Science doesn't know. I'm going to guess that you think you know.

a reply to: Andy1144

No. You maybe, but "most pleasurable outcome" is wrong.

originally posted by: Peeple
Does it still have anything to do with the topic?

I think so. OP said people need to wake up and I guess we are discussing what that means.

a reply to: Peeple

Did you read the "what we perceive" part?

a reply to: daskakik

It's an obvious fact, but ok let's say we don't know. Science knows there is no free will and it is certain, unchangeable. This rule cannot be broken because it is even seen in experience that my next thought/impulse/descision is just happening and there is no control there.

a reply to: Andy1144

Even with that it is wrong because people do a lot of things because they need to be done and not because it brings them pleasure.

originally posted by: Andy1144
Science knows there is no free will and it is certain, unchangeable.

Depends on what you consider free will.

originally posted by: Andy1144
a reply to: daskakik

This is all just relative?

Subjectivity is all we have, what else could it be?

You don't mean anything material so what is "reality".

Whatever is happening in experience and can be verified directly. So in reality, what is the experience of the body like? Without assuming how it is like. For example, we assume that there is a separation in experience when our fingers touch the keyboard. But in reality, it's just one experience. Thoughts assume things about experience and assume that is reality. Just whatever is happening now minus thoughts about it.

In reality, it looks like we are here and the screen is over there. But beyond this assumption, what is reality like? The screen is just being seen. It's just being seen, that's it. Saying there is a "me" seeing it, is to assume something about direct experience/reality. Here and there have no basis in reality, because "there" implies something tangible "here". But there is no such thing in reality.

So you say that their is someone experiencing but he can't think?

No, there is also no experiencer, the experience is just happening. Saying the experience is happening to me is to assume it happens to thought/assumption. In reality experience is just happening to consciousness, not to a separate person living in the head. This is an assumption. Experience doesn't belong to someone does it? That's just an assumption.

What is a real thought?

There are two levels. On one, no thought is real. On the relative, Santa is not real, Jim Carrey is. In reality no thought is real, however thoughts must still be used to function.

Parts like this?

a reply to: daskakik

Depends on what you consider free will.

Any control of will free from any circumstance.

a reply to: Andy1144

I control my thoughts, not the impuls, but i am no animal so i can within less than a second change my mind.
That's where the phrase comes from and gets so much common usage. My free will allows me to change my mind.
But i don't expect you to understand, since you have no self and therefor no self controll.

a reply to: Andy1144

You can't use a term to define itself.

a reply to: daskakik

Ok, so do you agree there is no free will free from circumstance or not? Simple question.

a reply to: Andy1144

I can't answer that if I don't know what you mean by free will.

ETA: I might also disagree with what you mean so, I might not answer the question even if you do tell us what you mean.

a reply to: daskakik

I might not answer the question even if you do tell us what you mean.

Why is this? All I am saying is that there is no free will free from circumstance. I am no more responsible for my next thought then the city I was born in because it all has to do with cause and effect. There is no one pulling the shots.

a reply to: Andy1144

Because I don't know what you mean by free will.

The way you are using it doesn't make sense.

a reply to: Andy1144

Again: you talk about impuls, not free will.