Hiya folks! just thought I'd see what you thought of this, what sort of oversights I might of had and other discussion on the concept.
Freedom:
It is a mutual conclusion to many of conventional studies that
human freedom/freewill is only illusion. That an environment
that one is exposed to dictates what someone becomes.
This environment consists of many variables from the parents who
raise you, the conditions of society, the experiences that you
happen upon, etc. It's the attributions of external factors that
dictates someone's beliefs, will, ambition, habits, acceptance
to new idea's, etc.
This would lead towards the conclusion that the idea of freedom
is an illusion. That what you are now is nothing more then a
prisoner to circumstance. That the level of your potential is
limited to your experience.
Given that the universe is in a constant flux, things growing,
dying, colliding with one another, etc. it is reasonable to
expect progression in any given person as well. When one rubs an
idea off on another person it is expected that the receiver has
now become a new person. For example if you map out a completely
thought out course of action it is reasonable to expect that
the one you told it to would immediately apply it and become a winner.
There is one very crucial thing that interrupts this process.
That is the limit in which one can comprehend an idea. When you
take a noble idea like peace and compare it to war, it would
first appear to be a no brainer to which one would benefit us
more. The problem here is that given enough thought you could
draw a comprehensive list of the pro's and con's for each and
reach the conclusion that neither is better then the other.
Without a particularly specific reference point or context the
two words 'war' and 'peace' essentially hold the same merit.
For example you could look at the tragedy of World War 2 and
tally up the suffering, terror, plight, etc. and on the other
hand count the scientific advancements, experience, lessons that
would both enhance society and not allow similar circumstances to
ever happen again. It is like a child who play's with fire to
burn himself, that child would learn not to do it again.
No matter how logical or critically thought out your stance on
something is, there is only so far you can go to debate before
going into incoherent rambling. That said, You could say that it is
impossible to defend any stance that you may have on anything.
The question begs "Why bother yourself with it?".
It is interesting to think about because:
A) This means that nobody really knows what their talking about.
B) No matter what anyone does they will never know.
So when You think about this it would seem the most logical thing to
do would be to stay devoted to what you feel is right for you
until you are proven wrong. Then you take on that new school of
thought and continue. Doing all of this despite being absolutely
sure that it is right.
How do you do that?
It is done when you detach from what you believe is you. Your
personality, body, relationship to the universe, etc. You must
come to terms with the idea that you know absolutely nothing.
When you are able to clear your head of all of this you will
only be left with a feeling.
Sometimes it will feel empowering and energizing, other times it
will feel horrible and repulsive. It is what is called your
'intuition'. emotions are the only thing that you'll have at any
given time whether or not it is buried under thoughts, concepts,
idea's that you distract yourself with throughout your days. It
is to that effect that it would seem most reasonable to not base
decisions on what you've calculated is right or wrong solely but
also consider what you feel is good or bad.
Their is a very comprehensive method of getting by without
relying solely on logistics or intuition. It is by combining
them! When you are able to critically think through and defend
an argument to it's limits. you are then able to truly find out if
there is a better way. You will then have the ability to
transcend to whatever that path is. Their will be times were you
will not be able to make any ground on
your reasoning skills alone so you'll also consider
how it makes you feel.
When you are truly honest with yourself you will be able to
distinguish from Positivity/Comfort and Negativity/Comfort. You
will be able to truly point out whether your acting a certain
way out of yearning to improve or the spite of change.
Wallowing in sorrow is a great comfort because when you are at
the realization of what you are truly capable of you will
realize the grand scope of your responsibility. You will realize
that everything you feel and experience is your fault. When you
doubt yourself you are essentially giving up any notion of
responsibility despite the reality. See the difference?
It is hard work but like giving birth to a child you will be able to
perceive a perspective previously unknown to you. Although
the wear and tear is considerably less and it's something you'll
look forward to doing again and again as you get better at it.
All that said, I believe that freedom is possible. When you
fully take into consideration the complete scope of opposite
arguments, accept that neither can be fully solidified and
proceed with the aid of a pure intuition, you will be
able to transcend the prison of circumstance, truly living free.
Freedom:
It is a mutual conclusion to many of conventional studies that
human freedom/freewill is only illusion. That an environment
that one is exposed to dictates what someone becomes.
This environment consists of many variables from the parents who
raise you, the conditions of society, the experiences that you
happen upon, etc. It's the attributions of external factors that
dictates someone's beliefs, will, ambition, habits, acceptance
to new idea's, etc.
This would lead towards the conclusion that the idea of freedom
is an illusion. That what you are now is nothing more then a
prisoner to circumstance. That the level of your potential is
limited to your experience.
Given that the universe is in a constant flux, things growing,
dying, colliding with one another, etc. it is reasonable to
expect progression in any given person as well. When one rubs an
idea off on another person it is expected that the receiver has
now become a new person. For example if you map out a completely
thought out course of action it is reasonable to expect that
the one you told it to would immediately apply it and become a winner.
There is one very crucial thing that interrupts this process.
That is the limit in which one can comprehend an idea. When you
take a noble idea like peace and compare it to war, it would
first appear to be a no brainer to which one would benefit us
more. The problem here is that given enough thought you could
draw a comprehensive list of the pro's and con's for each and
reach the conclusion that neither is better then the other.
Without a particularly specific reference point or context the
two words 'war' and 'peace' essentially hold the same merit.
For example you could look at the tragedy of World War 2 and
tally up the suffering, terror, plight, etc. and on the other
hand count the scientific advancements, experience, lessons that
would both enhance society and not allow similar circumstances to
ever happen again. It is like a child who play's with fire to
burn himself, that child would learn not to do it again.
No matter how logical or critically thought out your stance on
something is, there is only so far you can go to debate before
going into incoherent rambling. That said, You could say that it is
impossible to defend any stance that you may have on anything.
The question begs "Why bother yourself with it?".
It is interesting to think about because:
A) This means that nobody really knows what their talking about.
B) No matter what anyone does they will never know.
So when You think about this it would seem the most logical thing to
do would be to stay devoted to what you feel is right for you
until you are proven wrong. Then you take on that new school of
thought and continue. Doing all of this despite being absolutely
sure that it is right.
How do you do that?
It is done when you detach from what you believe is you. Your
personality, body, relationship to the universe, etc. You must
come to terms with the idea that you know absolutely nothing.
When you are able to clear your head of all of this you will
only be left with a feeling.
Sometimes it will feel empowering and energizing, other times it
will feel horrible and repulsive. It is what is called your
'intuition'. emotions are the only thing that you'll have at any
given time whether or not it is buried under thoughts, concepts,
idea's that you distract yourself with throughout your days. It
is to that effect that it would seem most reasonable to not base
decisions on what you've calculated is right or wrong solely but
also consider what you feel is good or bad.
Their is a very comprehensive method of getting by without
relying solely on logistics or intuition. It is by combining
them! When you are able to critically think through and defend
an argument to it's limits. you are then able to truly find out if
there is a better way. You will then have the ability to
transcend to whatever that path is. Their will be times were you
will not be able to make any ground on
your reasoning skills alone so you'll also consider
how it makes you feel.
When you are truly honest with yourself you will be able to
distinguish from Positivity/Comfort and Negativity/Comfort. You
will be able to truly point out whether your acting a certain
way out of yearning to improve or the spite of change.
Wallowing in sorrow is a great comfort because when you are at
the realization of what you are truly capable of you will
realize the grand scope of your responsibility. You will realize
that everything you feel and experience is your fault. When you
doubt yourself you are essentially giving up any notion of
responsibility despite the reality. See the difference?
It is hard work but like giving birth to a child you will be able to
perceive a perspective previously unknown to you. Although
the wear and tear is considerably less and it's something you'll
look forward to doing again and again as you get better at it.
All that said, I believe that freedom is possible. When you
fully take into consideration the complete scope of opposite
arguments, accept that neither can be fully solidified and
proceed with the aid of a pure intuition, you will be
able to transcend the prison of circumstance, truly living free.