A challenge to show me wrong

[doppelganger]

What do you mean?

Which part of the subconscious is the "will"?

 

[Willamena]

So, were you born against your will?

The distinction is that it's something that happened to you in contrast to something you made happen.

 

[Koldo]

Which part of the subconscious is the "will"?

I don't have an answer for this question.
The mind has to be further explored before i can come up with a definite answer.
Perhaps a part in itself but this would be just a speculation.

 

[Willamena]

I must somehow be lost here,
because to me
Will has to do with what one wants,
and what one does to obtain/bring forth/manifest
that desire.
A most conscious endeavor.

I think that's where most of us are leaning. A "wilfull" act has intent, deliberation, violition, and everything else that consciousness implies.

 

[doppelganger]

I don't have an answer for this question.
The mind has to be further explored before i can come up with a definite answer.
Perhaps a part in itself but this would be just a speculation.

Then how do you know it's a part of the subconscious?

 

[Koldo]

So, were you born against your will?

As i have said, this is not possible.

The distinction is that it's something that happened to you in contrast to something you made happen.

My will "happened" to me, and i can only do things in accordance to it.
Therefore it is what happened to me that defines what i make happen.

 

[Koldo]

Then how do you know it's a part of the subconscious?

Because i know it is not part of the conscious.

 

[Willamena]

My will "happened" to me, and i can only do things in accordance to it.
Therefore it is what happened to me that defines what i make happen.

When you say this, are you picturing two sides of the same event, one unconscious, one conscious? If so, I like this image.

 

[doppelganger]

Because i know it is not part of the conscious.

How does it actually work though? Is it like "gut feelings" or aesthetic reactions? And does the "conscious mind" "choose" if the subconscious will has already acted? Isn't the conscious mind kidding itself about being "free" if it only validates preferences already recognized in the subconscious?

 

[Koldo]

When you say this, are you picturing two sides of the same event, one unconscious, one conscious? If so, I like this image.

Yes, albeit i am not sure i see it the same manner you do.

 

[Koldo]

How does it actually work though? Is it like "gut feelings" or aesthetic reactions?

Everytime we select an option we make use of our will.
Think on questions you have already answered in this life.
In some you have said the truth because that is what you wanted to.
In others you have said a lie because that is what you wanted to.
What is that drives you to select the answers that you do? Your will.

And does the "conscious mind" "choose" if the subconscious will has already acted?

It writes down the answer as i have said before.

Isn't the conscious mind kidding itself about being "free" if it only validates preferences already recognized in the subconscious?

Yes. That is the illusion of free will.

 

[Willamena]

Yes, albeit i am not sure i see it the same manner you do.

Two "sides," one the unconscious doer, one the conscious observer. Like Doppleganger said earlier, the observer watching the movie play out, a reflection of forces he's not in control of, but of which he takes possession and make "his own" action by virtue of awareness.

Something like that?

 

[Koldo]

Two "sides," one the unconscious doer, one the conscious observer. Like Doppleganger said earlier, the observer watching the movie play out, a reflection of forces he's not in control of, but of which he takes possession and make "his own" action by virtue of awareness.

Something like that?

Yes.

 

[Willamena]

Yes.

I'm slow, but I get there eventually.

 

[Copernicus]

I don't think that there is a single "subconscious" mind. Rather, there are a lot of mental processes going on simultaneously all the time that are not the focus of attention. We can sometimes shift our attention to those processes quite easily when we want to--for example, functions of the autonomous nervous system that control breathing. Yogins practice techniques for gaining access to those parts that are not so easy to shift attention to. So I would say that the "unconscious" will is very open to conscious awareness. If you ask me why I chose to perform a certain action, I can usually tell you what I think motivated it. On the other hand, I might resist telling you--or even admitting to myself--what the strongest motivation was behind the action. In every mind, there are two sides to every decision--the winning side and the losing side. Both exist in the same mind.

 

[idav]

How does it actually work though? Is it like "gut feelings" or aesthetic reactions? And does the "conscious mind" "choose" if the subconscious will has already acted? Isn't the conscious mind kidding itself about being "free" if it only validates preferences already recognized in the subconscious?

Part of actually going against our will may be the only free will we actually have. If we are programmed to do something like eat sleep and procreate, going against these urges wouldn't be free will? The right and left brain seem fight each other the same as the subconcious and concious. These battles inside our thoughts are consant leaving a multitude of choices. This is how one of the AI movies explained it. Giving the brain something that can almost act as an override of basic instincts. These conflicts give what we see as choice and free will.

Some things we cant even know like our beating heart or breathing lungs but we can influence these things but only to a very minimal extent. What we can control is worth noting as free will. A rock is designed to sit there and if it could at least hop around it would go against its nature. The more comlex it gets the larger amount of free will a creature has.

 

[marky mark]

Proper understanding of the freedom of the will in the fallen human condition is assisted by distinquishing "free agency" from "free will." "Free agency" is a mark of humanity as such. All humans are free agents in the sense that they make their own decisions about what they will do, choosing as they please in the light of their conscience, inclinations, and thoughts. They are answerable to God for their choices. "Free Will" is the ability to choose any at all of the moral options offered in any given situation. But to a person who has not been regenerated, their hearts are not inclined toward God; they are in bondage to sin and cannot be freed from this slavery except by the grace of salvation. Such an understanding of the fallen will is taught by Paul in Rom. 6:16-23. Only a will that has been set free is able to choose rightousness freely and heartily.

 

[Copernicus]

Part of actually going against our will may be the only free will we actually have. If we are programmed to do something like eat sleep and procreate, going against these urges wouldn't be free will? The right and left brain seem fight each other the same as the subconcious and concious. These battles inside our thoughts are consant leaving a multitude of choices. This is how one of the AI movies explained it. Giving the brain something that can almost act as an override of basic instincts. These conflicts give what we see as choice and free will.

I think that we have basic instincts that you do not count as such, for example, the instinct to fit in with larger groups. Morality is the set of rules for interacting safely and comfortably with others. Socialization is as much an instinct as the desire to possess your neighbor's belongings. It is true that we can override some of our "basic instincts", but what motivates us to do so are stronger basic instincts.

Some things we cant even know like our beating heart or breathing lungs but we can influence these things but only to a very minimal extent. What we can control is worth noting as free will. A rock is designed to sit there and if it could at least hop around it would go against its nature. The more comlex it gets the larger amount of free will a creature has.

Rocks do not have basic instincts, let alone sensing organs and actuators that would allow them to move.

 

[Koldo]

Part of actually going against our will may be the only free will we actually have. If we are programmed to do something like eat sleep and procreate, going against these urges wouldn't be free will?

No, because that is also programmed.

The right and left brain seem fight each other the same as the subconcious and concious. These battles inside our thoughts are consant leaving a multitude of choices. This is how one of the AI movies explained it. Giving the brain something that can almost act as an override of basic instincts. These conflicts give what we see as choice and free will.

The will is complex to the point there may exist contradicting positions within the same individual. However, the will seems to have a particular hierarchy order.

Some things we cant even know like our beating heart or breathing lungs but we can influence these things but only to a very minimal extent. What we can control is worth noting as free will.

But who's in control?
Your will.

A rock is designed to sit there and if it could at least hop around it would go against its nature. The more comlex it gets the larger amount of free will a creature has.

If a rock was able to hop around then that would be part of its nature.

 

[Storm]

Jumping back in......
First, definitions from my glossary.

Rhys:
Rhymes with hiss when whispered. Plural, rhys. If you can say it loudly, you're saying it wrong.
1)The divine consciousness
2)The divine seed of mortal consciousness, not seeming (my rhys; our rhys)

Seeming:
Life is a spectrum, the infinitely complex interaction of rhys and divine matter. The seeming is that interaction, the incarnation.

This is vastly oversimplified, but it might help: matter -> biochemistry -> cells -> organs -> brain -> psyche -> spirit -> rhys.

Everything from biochemical processes to spirit is the seeming, and ultimately mortal. Only matter and rhys continue after death.

Spirit vs. psyche:
The psyche is intimately connected to the brain. Our emotions, memories, speech patterns, and unconscious habits. It's only slightly less biological than spiritual. Drugs can affect it, as can injury. Likewise, it can affect the body: emotional trauma translating as physical symptoms, or the placebo effect.

The spirit, however, is something else. Our ideals, reason, willpower, personality traits. You can't give someone a pill to make them a Democrat, or change their sexual orientation. The spirit is still part of the seeming, and therefore mortal and connected to biology, but much less so than the psyche.


Free will would be a function of the spirit/ rhys.