Free Choice or Chioce by Evolution of Consciousness?

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

A plant does not evolve from its seed... it grows from it like something that unfolds. Growth came from what was already there in the input... the seed. Growth is locally determined. If a plant evolves, it evolves from an uncorrelated input (pseudo-random) like a cosmic ray, which was NOT locally determined. Evolution requires something locally unnatural and non-determined. If the cosmic ray was accounted for as part of the genes of the entire world, then evolution is NOT evolution... it is just the growth of world. But growth requires a known seed. Thus evolution and determinism are at odds with each other. Either evolution is really deterministic without the knowledge of the initial state, or there is a true random variable and thus nothing is deterministic. The next step of evolution requires selectivity by something external, which means that it just adapted to something external. So whether you are thinking deterministic growth or evolution by random variable and selectivity, both came from something external.

Is not Evolution merely the unfolding of Creation in a concept we call time and space? Is not the plant that grows dependent on the totality of the rest of the universe? Does it not require more than 'local' conditions? Is not every single thing needed to cooperate for that growth to take place. Sun, wind, space, particles in the air, soil, insects, temperature, terrain etc etc? Can growth come from what is already in the input (the seed) without interdependence on All that Is?

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Whereas I have stated that choice requires something coming out that did not go in. I am effected by the state of the flesh and I am effected by the environment, but I unaturally select from each. I can produce pseudo-random numbers that are uncorrelated from anything. I can employ a routine to crank on a seeded number to say for certain whether it is prime or not. I can choose between the two. I am above both evolution and growth, employing both as mere toys.

What is natural that you select unaturally? Is it not obviously natural to you?
Are you really above both evolution and growth? Can you change one speck of dust from out of its place without the cooperation of All that Is? Can you indeed produce random numbers uncorrelated from ANYTHING as if there were no basis? Does not even the things we once thought were created from chaos have basis that we are still discovering through science? Did you make yourself from nothing? Do not all things in nature have order? Is that flesh and bones and mind of yours any more than a creature subject to All that Is and has not your world of reality that you base such notions on proved itself full of false perceptions time and time again so as to create a reality that would be as different from others as numerous as the sand in the sea is? If so, then where is truth? Perhaps it lies not in perception which has proven in history to be in error more times than not.

Originally Posted by cyberpi

How? I don't know. If I were only a growing plant, then I am not responsible for my genes. If I were only an evolving entity, then I am not responsible for the cosmic ray that slapped me into thinking something new, or the environment that selected me. But if I have a choice between the two, then I am responsible and only then do I care about my decision. I feel that I have that choice. I can not prove it to you. If I am wrong then I could really care less because I never had a choice. Either it was pre-determined and not my responsibility, or it was random and not my responsibility, or it was my choice and I am responsible. To think otherwise is to hold me responsible for something that came externally.

I hold you responsible for nothing. Perhaps to do so would be error on my part. There are actions and there are consequences. Perhaps 'right' and 'wrong ' are only self created concepts. Perhaps your 'either' it was ''this or 'that' is nothing but a conundrum you have made. It seems to me that 'ego' and 'separateness' would dictate either way. At one stage it absolves itself of responsibility and at another it takes full responsibility. Perhaps it is illusory and the position not even applicable to true reality.

Thanks for your intersting response,
Love in christ,
JM

[JosephM]

So as not to detract from my original purpose of post by additional philosophical statements, I would like to re-present the implication of the first post's understanding....


At the present level of understanding in this mind, it is very beneficial to have a clear understanding at what is being implied. Understanding and awareness is key to the evolution of consciousness. Understanding that choices are not free in the sense that one might think of them helps us to empathize with our fellow frail human beings whom are in the same boat. This truth helps us release our anger and un-forgiveness of others, who through ignorance oppose themselves and releases our compassion for them.

Love in Christ,
JM

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by JosephM

I have merely asked you questions to stimulate you to be backed up against an invisible barrier that will leave you with absolutely no belief one way or the other for at least one moment so that you might then for a moment 'see' beyond belief that which I perceive is most close to you now.
As you allow me, I get a glimpse of your reality and I see that you are close to a breakthrough in your self created barrier. You sense something in my words but that is not where the 'sensing' is coming from. It is 'within you', always was and even now is and can never be truly separate except in a construct of mind.
JM

Hi,

Barriers and resistance seem to be cropping up a lot. Would you care to elaborate?

s.

[Caimanson]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Whereas I have stated that choice requires something coming out that did not go in. I am effected by the state of the flesh and I am effected by the environment, but I unaturally select from each. I can produce pseudo-random numbers that are uncorrelated from anything. I can employ a routine to crank on a seeded number to say for certain whether it is prime or not. I can choose between the two. I am above both evolution and growth, employing both as mere toys. How? I don't know. If I were only a growing plant, then I am not responsible for my genes. If I were only an evolving entity, then I am not responsible for the cosmic ray that slapped me into thinking something new, or the environment that selected me. But if I have a choice between the two, then I am responsible and only then do I care about my decision. I feel that I have that choice. I can not prove it to you. If I am wrong then I could really care less because I never had a choice. Either it was pre-determined and not my responsibility, or it was random and not my responsibility, or it was my choice and I am responsible. To think otherwise is to hold me responsible for something that came externally.

It's a very interesting debate.
I tend to agree with the concept that free will exists, but only in our concious self awareness, otherwise it is just plain illusion.
In the scale of things, say within the square meter of my existence, yes I do have some form of free will, in the larger scale of things it seems to me I am a lab rat exercising my free will within the fixed boundaries of a maze.

Cyberpi, I think that by adding responsibility into the equation you are distorting the outcome your reasoning.
Responsibility is a human construct that relies on consciousness and awareness of self and others. For good or bad we are heavily programmed by society and culture, and perhaps genes. Even if we did have a spirit independent from the material, isn't that preordained and affected by a higher entity?

The only reason we say a rock does not have responsibility, is because in our eyes we cannot see consciousness and capacity for willed action. But is conciousness another illusion?

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by JosephM[FONT=Arial

At the present level of understanding in this mind, it is very beneficial to have a clear understanding at what is being implied. Understanding and awareness is key to the evolution of consciousness. Understanding that choices are not free in the sense that one might think of them helps us to empathize with our fellow frail human beings whom are in the same boat. This truth helps us release our anger and un-forgiveness of others, who through ignorance oppose themselves and releases our compassion for them.

Exactly right! I can empathise with others because I know that I'm being driven by my programming in a fashion similar to them. But...We always have choices, whether we're aware of them or not. And, you really can't control anything until you can control yourself. That's basic. So yeah, I empathise. "There but for the grace of God...". But that doesn't excuse anything, and it doesn't mean that we can't act contrary to our animal nature, or whatever you want to call it. We may not ever be aware of all possible choices in a given situation, but we can make an informed choice--even a hard choice.

Chris
[/font]

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

[/b]Exactly right! I can empathise with others because I know that I'm being driven by my programming in a fashion similar to them. But...We always have choices, whether we're aware of them or not. And, you really can't control anything until you can control yourself. That's basic. So yeah, I empathise. "There but for the grace of God...". But that doesn't excuse anything, and it doesn't mean that we can't act contrary to our animal nature, or whatever you want to call it. We may not ever be aware of all possible choices in a given situation, but we can make an informed choice--even a hard choice.

Chris
[/size][/font]

Hi Chris,
Yes. We indeed do have choices and the understanding of its limitations does help us empathize with others. That was the point in gaining a clearer understanding. Thanks for your comments.
JM

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by Caimanson

It's a very interesting debate.
I tend to agree with the concept that free will exists, but only in our concious self awareness, otherwise it is just plain illusion.
In the scale of things, say within the square meter of my existence, yes I do have some form of free will, in the larger scale of things it seems to me I am a lab rat exercising my free will within the fixed boundaries of a maze.
(snip)

Hi Caimanson,

Thanks for your comments. However, I'd like to look at it as more of a discussion and stimulation rather than debate. There are no winners or losers in this thread. Hopefully everyone can learn or get a clearer understanding including me. I especially enjoyed your comment concerning the comparison to the lab rat.

JM

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

Hi,

Barriers and resistance seem to be cropping up a lot. Would you care to elaborate?

s.

No. Not really thank you. But I do like your tenacity.

Love in Christ,
JM

[Paladin]

May I please play the poet in this version of Mindwalk?
It would seem, or so it may only appear to this addled brain that the difficulty always must lie in top-downers discussing things with bottom-uppers.
In two dimensions there lies confusion, and even more in three, but add a fourth, imagine a fifth and what we no longer understand becomes quite crystal.
Resistance and Barriers can only mean the Universe awaits a resounding "Yes!" but for now, and only for some it has become the Koan for our frustrated meditation.

Peace

[cyberpi]

I had responded to the "choice is an illusion" belief. For the rest, I am in agreement. I think of it more as knowing only the person you've taken every step with. I take the extremes of a grandparent and a child, thinking of how the child looks at the grandparent and how the grandparent looks at the child. Then when you consider two people the same age who were dealt different cards (genes, parents, environment) and travelled different steps, each can be like a child and a grandparent at the same time to each other... or not.

I think the 'choice' or the 'will' in Faith needs to be hilighted above 'believe' and 'trust' for the very reason of this thread. I think it has been lost. I'd like to respond to the questions on this thread later... right now I wanted to try a different approach:

If a person with age says to a child, "Would you like us to do (a), (b), or (c)?" Then I submit that Faith has been placed in the child. What this means to me is that for that moment in time something of the child's life is written or determined by the child. Something comes out of the child that did not go in. The options (a), (b), and (c) were selected and came externally to the child from the adult. But then something came out of the child... a decision. Whatever the belief of where that decision comes from: whether the child mentally flipped a coin in his/her mind, or a gene in the child made the decision, or an environment fully programmed the child's decision ahead of time, or that the person asking the question somehow programmed the outcome, or that the child just turned to someone else and asked them, or that a child is some magical soul unknowingly driving a car that just looks like a human body... I leave that all for debate or timid conversation. But regardless of that answer, my question here is do people recognize that a choice is somehow special, that being given a choice by the world is special, and that giving others in the world a choice is special? By special I mean that it is something of value. Not just something different or unique from person to person, but something perhaps more important than the food a person has to eat.

Yesterday I talked with a child in tears crying because somebody made a decision for her a couple of years ago that effected her life. Basically the child wanted to turn back time and change something. If choice is important to a child, and to a grandparent, maybe that says something about this evolution of consciousness concept. Or maybe this 7 year old had already evolved. I submit that a person can live a life being fully programmed by the environment by never really employing his/her will to choose, but then the other extreme is that a person can live demanding that he/she always gets his/her way by wanting to make all the choices.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by JosephM

No. Not really thank you. But I do like your tenacity.

Love in Christ,
JM

Hi,

Not dialogue, but a barrier then.

I'm confident I'm not going to figure anything out on this basis.

s.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Paladin

It would seem, or so it may only appear to this addled brain that the difficulty always must lie in top-downers discussing things with bottom-uppers.
In two dimensions there lies confusion, and even more in three, but add a fourth, imagine a fifth and what we no longer understand becomes quite crystal.
Resistance and Barriers can only mean the Universe awaits a resounding "Yes!" but for now, and only for some it has become the Koan for our frustrated meditation.

Peace

Hi,

Yes, from this thread I am mostly getting just an addled brain. Just one example: top-downers and bottom-uppers!!!??? I'm not sure I'd like to be described as either of them!

s.

[Francis king]

there are two truths-
that which has the qualities of truth (samvrttisatyam), but which by inference, is not the whole truth, and then there is that truth which is beyond the question of truth (paramarthamsatya)...

nothing in life is free, so why should will, or choice, be different? people don't choose to be born into poverty, somebody somewhere makes that choice for them. With the best will in the world if you have no legs, u will never play in the premier league. If your mum and dad are junkies and u grow up in a childrens home, just like everyone else, you can dream your great dreams, but you're less likely to reach ur true potential, or acheive those dreams, than Sebastian who went to Eton and who spends his summers in San Tropez...

you can only make choices from the options you are presented with... the fewer your options, the more limited ur choices... it is only when you evolve, intellectually, that you can "see beyond" the meagre lot you have been given, realise that u can transcend these bonds, and then u can move onto, for instance, supporting the football team of choice, rather than blindly support the same team as ur dad, and his dad b4 him...

and yet- not everyone has the sophisticated level of reasoning needed to be able to comprehend how society and civilisation has moulded them, each part, since childhood, before and beyond... they are not all historians with a penchance for comparative psychology, they cannot see how ensnared they are, by unwritten rules and rituals, will not acknowledge how impressed they have been by the great ideas, artworks, entertainments they have been exposed to, they do not know how very little they have that truely belongs to them, as they are too caught up in living for such introspection...

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I had responded to the "choice is an illusion" belief.

(SNIP)

I leave that all for debate or timid conversation. But regardless of that answer, my question here is do people recognize that a choice is somehow special, that being given a choice by the world is special, and that giving others in the world a choice is special? By special I mean that it is something of value. Not just something different or unique from person to person, but something perhaps more important than the food a person has to eat.

Yes. I for one do. And it is not 'choice' that is the illusion from this world perspective but 'free choice'. As I wrote in the first post.

" All choices then are bound by the level of consciousness and understanding that exists at the time of choice. Only a fully enlightened or awakened being with full understanding of context would have free choice but then it disappears as choice. This is because choice itself is a non-existent reality.

The non-existent reality is only from the view of enlightenment because there exists no such thing to choose. Subject and Object are One. How can there be a choice where there is no other or thing to choose. Such is the nature of completeness and such is the undescrible changeless nature of God/Reality.

I really liked your whole post but felt only the need to respond to your question.

Love in Christ,
JM

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

Hi,

Yes, from this thread I am mostly getting just an addled brain. Just one example: top-downers and bottom-uppers!!!??? I'm not sure I'd like to be described as either of them!

s.

Hi Snoopy,

Merely disregard that portion of that post comment as error. If one could put numbers or labels on individuals, they would have no meaning to God or reality since there is no such thing as one being 'better' or 'higher' than another. Whether, an eye, an ear, a mouth the feet, the head, it makes no difference as they are a required part of the whole. Personally, I am a bottom-upper and proud of it.. "Really"?.... No. Just a Man sometimes. No more.. no less.

JM