Well, would you live your life differently if you found that you had only 30 days to live? Would anything about your life change if that were the case? Would you tell people that you loved them? would you make a will? Would you take care of your body...or stop taking care of your body?

-d

Perhaps it would be better if we always lived our lives as if we only had a few days left. After all, you could be knocked down by a bus whilst crossing the road, have a completely unexpected heart attack, etc. Life is short when taken in the context of the universe - enjoy each moment now, there may not be another.

I concur with both Kevin and L.Dragon in theory. But, it seems that both of you are discounting the fact that we are, first and foremost, animals. No matter how lofty our thoughts become, no one escapes the flesh and blood of life. The word "should" always comes up when we are conjuring up an escape from how things are. "Should" personifies a belief in free will ? that we are able to choose to do what we "should" do (or not do).

It is not that we "should do nothing", or "should live life as if it is fleeting". Life is fleeting and we do nothing, despite how long we feel life is, or what we think we do. Even knowing this is so doesn't change experiencing the ebb and flow of our primate biology. If I've got an itch, I'll scratch it.

Now, I'm just calling 'em as I see 'em, which often rubs folks the wrong way, so please don't take what I say personally. If I had free will, I'd change and become a bit more diplomatic... alas...

Hmm . . . let me jump in here. I think we all agree about the part where we "should" always focus on the moment and so on. In fact, I would venture to guess that everyone would go along with that idea in theory. That is not to say that everyone would implement that philosophy (only a very few persons to varying degrees, if at all, methinks). This is of course true of most ideas that go against our instinctive nature, like a lot of the Tao Te Ching; "My words are very easy to understand and very easy to put into practice, yet no one in the world can understand them or put them into practice." Would you agree that a majority of people don't really consider this (or really consider, period) most of the time?

What I found most intriging in this discussion so far was:

Little Dragon:

Yes we are animals - we have physical needs that need to be met, but that is not all we are and whilst we must guard against our human tendency to over-intellectualise things, we must still be true to our nature.

This is interesting . . . "we must still be true to our nature." What IS our true nature? Personally I would say that part of our "true nature" is to always be thinking ahead -- where will I get my next meal, what will I do next, etc. -- which suited us very well in the "wild." But this doesn't include focusing on the moment. I'm guessing that isn't quite what you mean by "true nature" . . . or is it? Set me straight.

OK, I've got three things I want to say, roughly in ascending order of importance:

1. And I quote:
   

   Tao Nut:

   By the way, Luke Abbott! I couldn't help but notice that you are the Site Admin. Woo! That must be an honor. Hey everyone! Luke's the Site Admin! nightcaps and hat's off to Luke Abbott! clapclapclapclapclapclap!

   OK, very funny. The web site gave me the title of Site Admin, not me. But that's what I am, after all. Now cut out the applause, or I'll have you banned!

2. And I quote again:
   

   Little Dragon:

   . . . now matter how mundane (doing the washing up, forcing a table down the cats' throat etc. . . .

   Well, I'm not from the UK, so I may just be out of the loop, but what the heck does "forcing a table down the cats' throat mean? :

3. I still what to know what our true nature is! You say that we have physical needs that need to be met, but that is not all we are. Please elaborate...

Buddy1:

As for what our true nature is, I believe our true nature just IS.

Well, I would say something along those lines, but I think Little Dragon was referring to something more:

Little Dragon:

Yes we are animals - we have physical needs that need to be met, but that is not all we are and whilst we must guard against our human tendency to over-intellectualise things, we must still be true to our nature.

"But that is not all we are," to me that means our "true nature" extends beyond our "animal nature." Personally, I would tend to disagree, but I want to understand exactly what this "true nature" is, and how it's different from other animals . . .

Talk of our 'true nature', 'animal nature' and so on just brings home the first chapter...The way that can be spoken of, Is not the constant way;.

I toss out 'true nature', 'animal nature' as concepts to ponder. Question is mystery. Answer spoils the deepest sense of mystery. I focus on us as 'animals' first and foremost to simplify the issue. 'Animal' is as deep a mystery as any other concept. I think we tend to get ahead of ourselves... thanks to our big brain. Turning back to a simpler view is helpful.

even with myth, belief, and shades & blinders on to help you when staring into the sun of reality, lifes a damn scary, lonely place. Giving all this up is even scarier.
Nothing worthwhile is easy, but it's hard, man! I find myself avoiding these 'deeper' sections of this forum, hanging out in the Tao louge, cracking wise and chit chatting, when i know i need to be reading the articles here-and i am-but my efforts just never seem to be enough-I want ansers and revelations NOW, but by wanting answers, i'm avoiding answers, missing the real questions, which have never been asked anyway...
-my own worst critic, though many are in line for that job...

Top of my list for '05: more meditation time...always making the kids at work slow down, stop and take a few minutes to be quiet and relax...need to practice it more myself...

True, I believe meditation adds years to your life, and certainly adds quality to it.
One thing that struck me about the messages concerning the 'trading spouses' show was the amount of jealousy directed towards Carl for 'not working' for having time to do yoga, meditate spend time with his kids. "He's home all day, doesnt work 9-5, he cant be a good father, he must have a hidden agenda", etc...
These people who reacted so negatively towards his ability to both have and use free time well really showed their hand. It was very revealing. People dont use their time wisely, they're rushing towards the grave, and they want to drag others with them.

I work graveyards, and when i'm bumming around during the day doing my business, I often get looks or comments that seem envious and even angry, like I'm not pulling my share of the world's weight. And when i suggest to friends that they stop and meditate, or try barefooting or other stress relieving techniques, they look at me as if I'm insane. "I dont have time", "thats not acceptable in my position" etc...really a shame. Fighting against the way, if you will...

There is no 'free' time, it's all bought and paid for, might as well use it to our advantage.

Sorry I've been absent for a while! New job - lecturer, I'm sure I need say no more!

I apologise for my typographical error - I meant a tablet not a table! Please do not fear for my cat's life; she will turn 13 soon and is a very contented being (and also healthy!).

Little Dragon:

... very few people know what balance is, let alone want to achieve it! Perhaps this is the fault of our western consumer driven society, I don't know.

That certainly appears to be the case. However, we have no 'choice' in the matter. You know, free will... bah hum bug.

Civilization is an destabilizing influence for humanity in particular and nature in general. It is a double edged sword, we get an inordinate amount of security and comfort, compared to wild animals. We pay for that with an inordinate sense of disconnection with nature which results in imbalance. Nature is pay as you go. You could even say we are 'addicted' to comfort and security and so are simply suffering the consequences of our addiction.

Oh, by the way, welcome back

Little Dragon:

...My feeling, and please do correct me if I'm wrong, is that you don't accept that we have free will.

OK Little Dragon, you asked for it...

It is not that I don't accept it. In fact, I believed whole heartedly that I had free will up until about 20 years ago when, while pondering the issue, doubt entered my mind. Try as I might, I could find no real evidence for it. Every so called example of free will that I could think of could be explained by the simple process of 'balancing desires'. This, the strongest need wins principle, appears to be at work, not only for us, but all life on earth.

Furthermore, I've asked many folks who believe in free will to give me an example of it at work. All examples so far can be easily explained by the simple observation that we end up doing, or refraining from doing, whatever we most need to do, or most need not to do.

Just to be clear about what I understand need to be... it is that driving emotional force, a thirst, we feel awaken within us. For example, we don't spontaneously say to ourselves, "I think I'll light a fire of need for eating food, watching TV, reading a book,..." (ad infinitum). What actually happens is that we feel the need/s ignite within. The type of need we feel at any moment is determined by our deep personal physical and emotional nature, our paradigm, and our surroundings. This foundational need operates in concert with, and is part and parcel of, our innate interests and talents. We don't choose them either, by the way; they arise from the same roots as need. Our 'free will' struggle comes into play when a need/s arises which is in conflict with another need/s (which we don't 'choose' to feel either). This sets up a state of emotional anxiety as the conflicting needs struggle to 'win'.

Let's say, for example: I'm fat; I love good food; I want to be thin to attract a mate; I'm a great cook. Each of these is either a need, or a conflicting need I feel. What role does free will play here? If I eat less, loose weight and become thin you'll say I exercised my free will, right? But that invokes a 'force' which can be explained by a much simpler observation. Not only simpler, but an observation that can be applied to all animals.

Here goes: I started eating less because the need to attract a mate was stronger than my need to eat good food. That I could eat less despite the fact that I'm a great cook is further proof of just how strongly I needed to attract a mate. This reasoning can be applied to any and all examples of human behavior, as well as animal behavior. This may explain why we believe in free will. Even an implied sense of free will allows us to feel superior to those other 'lower' animals. Interestingly, I run across people who at this point don't want to discuss it any further. They get uncomfortable because, I assume, they treasure their belief in free will, but can not 'prove it'. Either that or it's my garlic breath.

I invite you to give me a real world example of free will. Like I said, I'm still waiting. If I see some evidence for it, I'll be the first to climb back on board. Until then I grow increasingly skeptical for although many claim it exists no one offers proof.

Now why am I harping on this issue of free will? It has to do with Buddha's view that we need to understand what is actually going on before we have any hope of mediating it. If free will is just wishful thinking, then our whole culture is founded on wishful thinking. That has to result in some intractable problems. One age old problem that arise from the belief in free will is that it fuels self certainty. The sense of a superior self allows us to rationalize the judgements we make about other people which allows us to get away with murder (literally and figuratively) and still maintain our sense of innocence. Free will provides the foundation for morality and all its attendant hypocrisy. When I think about it, the belief in free will is like a belief in God. In the West, both beliefs go hand in hand, i.e., free will is our way to avoid the 'devil' and live a righteous life. In the East free will is more of an implied belief, i.e., you can fiddle with your karma, or you can choose to be mindful. In truth, you are mindful only when you feel the need. How you come to feel the need to be mindful is part of life's mysterious way.

Whew, them's a lot a words... sorry. If I had free will, I probably would not have written quite so much. Thankfully I can insert a smiley face here and there

Good to hear from you. I sure empathize with your "one thing after another". Now, I'm going to be brief for once!

Simply said, would you agree that it all boils down to the fact that what we see is the mirror reflection of what we 'don't want' to see?

Specifically, maybe you 'don't want' to see that free will is an illusion... or maybe... I don't want to see that free will is real. So, we see the world that we each want to see.

There is no proof, either way, so instead, let's look at the impact our respective views have on our life. As I used to believe in free will and now no longer do, I have some experience in both paradigms. Thus, I have noticed that...

1) Absent free will, judging others become almost impossible, as does casting stones at other's 'bad choices'. Self forgiveness comes easily, and with self forgiveness naturally flows the forgiveness of others, as does settling, like water, into the 'lower position'.

2) Present free will, judging my own or another's 'poor choices' in life becomes unavoidable, as does the contention which inevitably ensues.

For the rest of it, nothing changes. In either case, (1) or (2), we continue doing what we need to do (or not do) and ignore what whatever we don't need to do (or not do).

Well, so much for being brief... Actually, that's not too bad...

First, welcome! welcome! welcome! Thank you for stirring the 'pot'.

zenjew:

...Can one truly choose to reject the concept of Free Will?...

Now, this is an easy one!

I don't see any evidence that we choose either to believe or not to believe. I suppose in the final analysis, all belief is based on faith, not proof as such. I faithfully believed in choice for 40 some years until I actually looked for some small shred of evidence that it was real and not just a projection of what I wanted to have. I ain't found any evidence yet, nor has anyone offered me any.

I suspect that we all need to believe in free will to make civilization work. One criteria of being civilized is not being like the other animals, i.e., instinct driven without free will. Having free will is the cornerstone myth of the human paradigm. It allows us to 'lay trips' on one another and ourselves which is the engine that keeps us interacting together in the massive cultures which have evolved, especially since the agricultural revolution (10,000BCE).

What say you?

Little Dragon:

Perhaps it would be better if we always lived our lives as if we only had a few days left. After all, you could be knocked down by a bus whilst crossing the road, have a completely unexpected heart attack, etc. Life is short when taken in the context of the universe - enjoy each moment now, there may not be another.

Hello ! I'm new to this forum, so I haven't had time to read everything.

But about what you said Little Dragon on page one of this topic, I was thinking this morning, before even joining this very ethical, emotional, and educational forum, about something related to living each day as if it were my last.

I was thinking that maybe it's wrong to think that way because we might do things that might kill us before our lives are meant to be ended...

For example, if I think that maybe I might die tomorrow or even today or even after an hour or a minute, I would try to do a thing that I didn't do in my life before, just for the sake of doing it before I die. I might try drugs, extreme sports, killing people, running naked in the streets, eating till I explode, having sex with anybody, or spending all my money. All these things will eventually kill me earlier that I was meant to be killed (who knows?). What if I got addicted to drugs? What if I got killed in sky diving? What if I went to jail after killing people? What if I got sick from running naked on the streets? What if I really "exploded" or got food-poisoning after eating a lot? What if I got AIDS after having sex with somebody I don't know being HIV positive? And last but not least, what if I spent all my money and couldn't afford to eat or buy shelter?... etc

I'm just a "kid" (17 years old), so correct me if something I said was misleading or even frivolous.

Anyways you will be hearing quite from me at this forum.
And I would like to salute The Abbotts Family, after meeting them for the first time on Trading Spouses this morning on TV, and having the curiosity to meet people with different habits and culture. (oh and I have read all the lies about the two episodes of Trading Spouses so don't worry, I know the realities about this special family).

A special Hello to Luke, by the way.

reply

try going through the day spontaneously reacting to everything around you, without any preconceived notions.

You are most certainly right. I didn't really think of it that way before, but I think it's very hard for anyone to really do that (going through the day spontaneously reacting to everything around him) since each person has set goals in his life which he would like to acheive, and so he wouldn't accept the fact that he might die soon, and thus it would be difficult for him to pause a bit from acheiving a goal in life and just enjoy life to its best just because he might die in the same day or the next. Anyways, didn't you tell me that things just happen...

In general, any action that you take because you feel you should because of this or that reason is inferior to an action that "just happens."

...now correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that you contradicted yourself in telling me that I should try [...] reacting to everything around me then in telling me that any action I take [...] is inferior to an action that just happens ... i'm really confused...

Anyways, thanks for replying; I appreciate it a lot !

reply

Hi guys,

My you've been busy, while I've been busy! Just catching up on my reading.

Carl, just a point in reply to your email where you said that accepting the concept of free will means that you have to stand in judgement on your own or others actions. Endless recriminations are not helpful. Although, unfortunately, we (human beings, that is) seem to enjoy trying to blame each other or ourselves for mistakes, rather than dealing with the results and moving on! Perhaps this is because humans, as a general rule, are rather caught up in their own egos or illusory self-images.

I have to say that I disagree with you. The exercising of free will doesn't mean that we have to be sanctimoniously judgemental. If you, of your own free will, make a decision, then you have to accept the consequences. Yes, sometimes it may turn out that, after you've made the decision some new information comes to light that would have changed your decision if you'd known about it in advance. This doesn't mean that you should turn round and say 'that decision was wrong' - you made the best choice with the information available and that's all anyone can do.

You state that absence of free will means non-judgement. Again I disagree. Take for example, the case of a murderer - would you say that he had no free will in his decision to murder another human being? If so, then why should we punish him for a decision over which he had no control?

Zenjew - I agree with your point that free will is often merely fleeting. Although, I believe that if we put our minds to it, free will would become a more stable and lasting thing. I have never said that I believe that every human being always exercises free will, merely that we have the capability to do so and that it does exist

You know Carl, it's possible that our differences really do lie in interpretations rather than actual facts (but only possible mind you - don't get your hopes up!)

There is also another possibility to take into consideration: I'm European, you're American; I'm British, you're American; I'm Welsh, you're American. While we both read the same texts and speak essentially the same language (strange american spellings notwithstanding!), there will always be differences in how we see things (note I don't mean to make any invidious comparisons - merely stating an obvious difference). History, both personal and wider, makes a difference to an individual's world view. Although we endeavour to take a more detached view of our respective societies, we have still been shaped by them.

It may be (perhaps is almost certain) that our views may never match up on this topic, but I'm sure that you know the quote "There are many paths to the summit of the mountain, but from the top the view is always the same". I am sure that, in the end, we will both reach the summit of this mountainous discussion, and find that the view is beautiful. (Although I do hope that you don't expect to reach the summit anytime soon! I have a feeling that we've barely made it past Base Camp!)

PS. How do you remember dreams? I'm always dead to the world - being a working mother does that to you!

Hi Carl! Another quick reply for you!! (It's the summer break, workload is lower, no evening marking/lesson prep. to do!)

First to answer this question: "Do only humans possess this ability for free will?" I don't know - perhaps/perhaps not. It may be that something like free will or free will itself only applies in creatures with a large enough brain to be able to plan for the future and remember what is past - so perhaps in the animal kingdom, we could apply this concept to the greater apes and to dolphins and whales. Please note I only say may because as yet we really don't know enough about these species to be able to say one way or another. I have never contended that I consider human beings to be uniquely gifted/cursed in this direction (depending on your viewpoint!). I still maintain that free will exists - just because most people don't exercise it on most occasions doesn't mean it doesn't exist - just that most humans can be pretty daft most of the time.

Second question: "If not, what other animals are capable of free will. Where in the kingdom of life on earth do you draw the free will line?" I believe that I've partially answered this question above. Although at the moment, I'm drawing a tentative line under those creatures with a brain large enough to have the capacity for forward planning etc., does not mean that science may not prove me wrong and extend the understanding of the brain function of many other species that would bring them across my proposed line (note this is a line, not a wall!)

"Mmmmm? Do I detect puzzlement over these question?" - yeh, right!

"I found people to have two 'personalities', who they really are, and their social personality they express when they are with their countrymen" - there is more of a difference than this - there are fundamental differences between how europeans and americans broadly feel on a number of subjects e.g. capital punishment (not that this precludes different individuals, both american and european being both for and or against the capital punishment policies of their respective governments).

Yes, maybe you're right - we are at the summit, but our views are different because we're standing back to back!

Little Dragon:

. . . It may be that something like free will or free will itself only applies in creatures with a large enough brain to be able to plan for the future and remember what is past - so perhaps in the animal kingdom, we could apply this concept to the greater apes and to dolphins and whales. . . .

Plan for the future and remember what is past . . . are we talking about "free will" here, or are we talking about intellegence, cognitive ability, rational thought, etc? Because I don't think anyone can deny that humans are best at that sort of thing; followed by apes, dolphins, etc., followed by the so-called "lower" animals, and so on. But that really isn't the issue, is it? The concept of free will (to me) should have little to do with intellegence (i.e., IQ) or being smart versus being daft...

Lynn Cornish:

... How about wisdom as just another word for 'free will'....

1)... Well, this seems a contradiction to me. You say we have no free will but you also say we get wiser as we grow older, ....

2)... Whatever you call it, genetic coding or instinct or free will or wisdom, there is a moment when we either fish or cut bait.

1) Wisdom comes to all animals as they age... or at least the one's with larger nervous systems. Free will is a myth based upon the life experience of wisdom. We assume that adult humans (not young children or other animals) can consciously 'choose' wisdom, and act accordingly. This, despite all the evidence that we don't. For example, some people are innately more impulsive by nature than others and so act more 'foolishly' for their age than others - and visa versa! Neither the impulsive natured person or the patient natured person 'chooses' to be the way they are. Yet, we will applaud the 'wise choices' of one and decry the 'foolish choices' of the other as though they choose their innate nature.

So why do we hold so tightly to this myth? We use this 'choice' myth as leverage to judge other people's lives as either superior or inferior to our own. Such judgements peg our position in the social hierarchy. We can relax socially when we know our place. This is one reason why even slaves and untouchables can endure hardship as well as they can. At the instinctive level, knowing where you stand in the 'tribe' is emotionally easier than the chaos and lonely disconnection of social uncertainty.

Furthermore, our faith based belief in free will is rooted in our sense of a separate 'self', i.e., you need to believe there is an 'I' which can 'choose'. The belief in 'I' bolsters the belief in free will, the belief in free will bolsters the belief in 'I'.

The free will myth is also closely connected with humanity's religious beliefs, morality and salvation. All religious belief systems promise salvation of 'I', while at the same time support free will (either explicitly as in Judeo-Christian-Islamic paradigm or implied as in the Far East), and call upon the 'I' to act righteously. Yet, it is the separate sense of 'I' that leaves us disconnected from Nature ('Eden') in the first place. Affirming the 'I' and beseeching the 'I' to act is ironic given that the only salvation is extinguishing 'I', as Buddha's Third Truth states or as Jesus put in when he said, ".... whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it."

2) Free will is a 'empowering' myth. Instinct is the biological push - needs and fears - that drives life to survive. All animals have instinct. Only humans are presumed to have free will (making this a little pat on our collective backs). If we say all life forms have free will, then free will become synonymous with instinct and that would de-myth the issue (and weaken our superior self image). As I said above, we use the free will myth for social leverage. If we acknowledged that instinct drives us all, we'd loose that social leverage and then what? We'd have to grow up and face ourselves. Ahhhh! ops:

hi all,
after having gone through all the post there is only one thing i can summarise on it. whether its free will , force will its always have one will that is the destined will.all our will have been destined without our realisation
and that is why it cause us so much problem in searching for our will.so once its destined then we dont have to argue about it as it bring us no benefit at all.so just live as you are and learn the good wisdom rather than
arguing things that not benefit us at all.

hi Lynn,
well i do hope you can understand what i am going to reply here as my answer is just a brief one only. the reason why i said we need to cultivate good virtue is that we can actually reduce or exchanging our suffering cause
from our previous life karma effect.and for your info our happening is already pre destined but because of our good virtue then the cause of effect
have been changing. so this good virtue is actually effecting the cause of karma and therefor our happening will change and if you just continue
your usual life without doing any good virtue then whatever happening
is already pre determined.this is not a mere said statement but its already
happen from my experience and others experience where i have done some
practical fact finding.i can teach you a way and you can see the result yourself if you want it.i do hope you can understand what i am writing here.

hi Lynn,
yes, we need to do something to get something and thats the
meaning of action and reaction. this is the law of karma or another meaning is the cause and effect.so normally we dont question why you do good but we will question why you do bad isnt it?so the good is always better then the bad dont you agree.so the good virtue is questionable in terms of the effect
and most of us also like to know why you do so good and this is definitely
help us to survive in this world which are full of suffering and with this
knowledge of good virtue effect then we can counter our suffering and as well find our true path to enlightenment. i have stated earlier that cultivating good virtue have been accepted by most religion in this world,
why?because this is one the universal law or the sacred script that taught us to cultivate good deeds and this is also one explanation where i have preached that we are actually have different religion but only one true destiny to achieve.so dont analise my last statement as this is going to be a lenghty discussion if you started it.