Why does it follow that these are the only two options available, and why is it a truism that a choice without cause is random? A choice without cause does not necessairly mean that choice was random.

A choice without any apparent cause is apparently random.

What about a choice made of free will, it might appear random, or caused, but in actuality is free.

"Why does it follow that these are the only two options available"

People like to indulge in these sorts of word games. Beyond what people like polytrip and benzyme are saying, not one single person posting in this thread has a god damn clue what is going on here..I feel quite confident saying that. Not me or anyone else has the answer becasue the whole thing is a paradox and is beyond us. People can coax they're egos all day long on the topic but I cant see anyone here actaully comming up with an answer.

Thank you oh supreme one for setting us stupid peons straight. Sigh.

Agreed...

Who did I call stupid or set straight? I mean go ahead and roll your eyes all you want but can you honestly tell me that you think anyone here can explain away the paradoxical state of the universe and how that weighs in with topics such as this? If you have the answer then please, enlighten me..becasue sighing and rolling your eyes at me is not going to convince me.

I never called anyone stupid I simply made an observation, one that I find valid. If you or anyone else here doesnt like it, well too bad. You can read as far as you want into my words and act like I said something I did not. I couldnt care less. I still dont think any of you have a verifiable answer to questions such as these.

Your last post appeared to be intentionally inflammatory and it was recieved that way. What did you expect? You took 20 something pages of comments and then tell us all that only two people know what they are talking about.

My eyes rolled becuase first you said only polytrip and benzyme know what they are talking about which implies the rest of us dont know what we are talking about. Then you go on to say that non of us have a clue including yourself. The second part of your statement I agree with btw, but i think almost everyone that has posted in this thread has some insight...including polytrip and benzyme. But to think we will arrive at the definitive answer that all will accept...nope that will never happen at a place like the nexus. To many opposing egos that can't allow for the possibility that they are wrong and others are right. The conversation could never get that deep here...

Ironically it was me that first made the point that if we could all start from the point of admitting that we don't know the conversation would go better. that point actuslly pissed a few people off and gathered a few snide remarks my way as well.

I guess I will leave this thread for the second...and final time..even though I consider this one of the most fascinating conversations a person could have with the right group if people....but almost with out fail these conversations fail on public forums because people always feel the need to come in and 'school' the other people....

Yes Joedirt I know, I have an abrasive side at times because I will often just say what I think..it is never ever personal so please dont take it that wat. I understand it pisses people off but it has gotten me farther in life than just going with what other people say all the time.

This thread just carries on and on and on and on, and this thread is like the revival of numerous free will threads in the past. The same things are said over and over.

I think polytrip and benzyme are taking the term free will down to a level where certain semantic paramaters are put into place and so in that context what they are saying does make alot of sense. Anything beyond that I just think that we have to remain humble and stand back in awe for a moment at how profoundly complex and non-sensical the universe seems to be. Instead of going back and forth argueing semantics as if rearranging some words is going to bring us the answer I think we need to seriousily admit that noone knows.

There will always be a paradox in place..always. I just dont see anyway around it and no ammount of logic is going to solve that problem.

Fair enough,

I'm right in line with much of what you are saying, barring any favoritism directed towards those who you deem as having more of a clue, as to the gist of this discussion. I am confident that most of us in the Nexian community are most emphatic that we are EACH unique and most worthy of commentary on the parameters of this thread. And it has changed direction several times, yet, retains the greater existential fundamentals which any good philosophical discussion might entertain.

Also, we are pretty much in agreement that nobody's got the corner on the "ultimate truth" or exclusive rights on the way of perceiving what is obviously, largely a subjective vantage point. I'm on board with benzyme's summation about our prefrontal cortex and the gradual development of the reasoning and contemplative mentality of our species. This is pretty much a given, right? Still, what makes any topic of debate a worthy one, is what the contributors share with the opposing viewpoint and I'm open to such insights. I admire the observations of others, and I don't feel compromised with my own beliefs because of this acceptance of another perspective. I just draw a line in the sand when unkindness rears it's ugly head.

I will not sit back and pretend that I have not perceived levels of consciousness, in which what I KNEW directly, through spiritual intuition, what is the reality of Self and the unifying principle of all being. God is fully present. Oneness is perceptibly imminent. This understanding was not the product of rational deduction, conditioned response or random chaos... it was a free choice to see beyond the boundaries of my limited scope, grasp, comprehension of this plane of being. It's a really big universe out there and it's a fairly descent interior expansion, inside of here, as well. All variable realities have an almost abstract plasticity, when viewed from the adjacent one over, or the alternate from the opposite side of the chess board. Meaning?

I feel that we have brought a number of significant points into consideration. I would hope that each of us has learned something worthwhile in this tangle of ideas and ideological constructs? I certainly have and I suspect that we have each redefined much of our stance. If not... mores the pity.

Data which can be logically quantified, is assuredly capable of being proven through methodical procedure and found to be more reasonable than not reasonable (or the perhaps, the very opposite result). This mechanism, however, cannot be applicable to any other aspect of the internally born, individual human experience. We have a mysterious interior core, after all. Our psychologies and spiritual beliefs are our own domain, right or wrong. Sure, we all want to be heard and ideally, we are all giving as much respect and cordiality as we ourselves expect through friendly discussion.

There are not just one, two, three or even 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,001 possibilities to any variable perspective about the notion of freewill, the human soul or the limitlessness of conscious awareness. It's the proverbial "Sky's the limit" on many macrocosmic and microcosmic levels of being. We all see the angle in which we have grown to perceive. We have come to this point in our personal evolution that we have need to communicate with other like-minded psychonauts.

Sometimes, that's all I see happening here. Our egos are bouncing back and forth and despite the friction this can generate, let's face it, we've had some profound commentary and also some schoolyard shenanigans. What a fine company of intelligent individuals. I personally feel that we're good. This is not a battle it's a dance. BTW, I don't polarize your insights and I hope that you don't mine, despite the whole Yogic spin I imbue it with. OK?





Please don't do that. Your open mindedness and balanced sensibility is an integral part of the dynamic involved in this occasionally furtive debate. I've always felt that between your scientific training and your open minded embrace of meditation and self inquiry, you were a fine median line between the polarized camps. You've got every right to voice your mind and stand by your personal convictions. We all believe what we perceive. Even when we question the appearances of what we might easily take for granted, we are essentially inquisitive explorers of ourselves. We are both, the very kernel of the quest and the crucible which pulverizes the tension between Divine Law and oblivion. :idea:

I think I have seen a little bit more of the same old existential debate. Why the heck not, eh? We may never come to any complete consensus, nor would this even be possible in a Utopian society of like-minded "deep thinkers". I'd like to believe that our differences make us a stronger community. Why would we need to conform to a consensus? As long as we are pleasant and elegant in our delivery, let's just kick up our heels, shall we? Hell, who wants to be in a Utopian cult anyway? That being said, there have been some unnecessary emotional elements creeping into this mix and I'd hate to see this bar you from your most worthy comments. I would personally feel a lack from your absence.

Besides, we can't let the wholly pragmatic, materialists have the edge in the playing field, now can we? After all, there is an infinity of light shining all about us, at every moment of this dichotomous paradigm, played out in the present, The Eternal Now. Or so it sometimes reveals itself to be... when the receptive soul sees the light and hears the calling.



Just because I love the Yellow Submarine and I'm really still a big kid at heart.

"I right in line with much of what you are saying, barring any favoritism directed towards those who you deem as having more of a clue"

What I meant by that was none of us have any universal answer. What polytrip and benzyme (and probly a few others I cant remeber every post) put forth was limted to personal defintions on the term that they clearly defined. I did not mean to say that you or joedirt do not have a valid point to make here, all I meant when I said "noone has a clue" was that none of us, including me have an answer to the question of free will in a broader context. By no means was I implying that only 2 people in this thread had a clue in general.

I tried to put it into practical terms, because it is an issue of consciousness. humans are unique in that aspect, that we have developed the ability to communicate such a profound concept, and while I feel that [human] consciousness manifests in the brain, I somehow also feel that it may be projected...psionic ability. everyone possibly has the potential, it's just something that eludes practical application. this sort of phenomena I think is not bound by physics, but I have no evidence. I suppose it's my belief.
I also suppose I believe that there is a greater consciousness, not sure what to call it...but it doesn't judge. this energy that we call consciousness that manifests in the brain, I somehow think does not die with it; again, I have no proof, but I observe laws of thermo.

The issue of free-will is a decision-based concept, and while it may not be completely free, it's also not an illusion. there are a lot of other terms that can also be debated in the same light.. 'coincidence', 'fate', 'destiny' etc..
these concepts have been debated since the dawn of 'free-thought'.
The problem, as has been mentioned before, is the limitations of language.

I feel simmilarly. I may have spiritual or even religious feelings now and then, but i always look at it this way: if there is a god, he probably gave us the power of rational thought for a good reason, if there is a god he would probably want us to use this power of reason he gave us. In other words, if there is a god, he would probably want us to doubt his existence as well as other metaphysical phenomena, and to seek for rational explanations.

I know that reason will not answer our deepest questions. Reason is a tool to navigate through existence in a world of material dimensions.

It is impossible to truly know anything about this existence. It is impossible to know a lot and it is impossible to know something precisely.

Physicists are desperately trying to come-up with a grand unifying theory to reconcile quantum mechanic's and relativity, but i can tell them in advance that such a theory cannot exist: when a theory contains more information it will become less precise and when it becomes more precise, it will become less 'grand'.
There is a limit to what theories can do, how much information they can contain, how precise they can be, how coherent they can be, etc.

This is an axiom, it is not something that could ever be proven. You just have to 'see' it.

Look at a theory like it's a lens. There are very good lenses that enable you to see whole new worlds, but every lens also distorts your vision. The distortion is mostly at the edge of your visual field, but every lens HAS it. So there will never be a lens that allows you to see everything and to see it precisely, undistorted.
There will never be a way of looking, a perspective, a view on life that could encompass all and be acurate.

Maybe if there would be such a counsciousness that knows and is aware of everything, it would be god or a universal counsciousness. Maybe we're all plugged into that greater counsciousness like in a 'matrix' or part of that greater thing somehow. Maybe if we where able to look beyond the planck length, we would see a program like 0's and 1's or something instead of something physical. But that perspective is out of reach for us. We're locked inside this world, in these dimensions, this scale.

I can feel like there may be a lot of things behind the curtain, but when i speak, i'll better just try to stick to what i know.

No one's asking you to go with what other people say, they're simply requesting that you be more polite in your dissent. If everyone at the nexus refused to censure themselves in such a manner, I think you'd find this a much more unpleasant place.

This doesn't make sense to me. It is impossible to isolate oneself from "Source". You are the expression of "Source" infinitely unfolding, and any isolation is just an illusing/delusion.

If you act freely or not freely (I believe in free will because there is no influence outside myself that prevents me from making choices...my will is my own and not something else's) then you are acting in accordance with "Source" and the unfolding.

some people get all serious about their christian beliefs, talking about "God's will" and whatnot. I just think...wtf is "God's will"? Who defined/interpreted it?
they would respond that it is written in scripture.
yeahhhhh.

God never talks to me, I must not be worthy. Or maybe I'm not listening (I've evolved to filter
out extraneous information, mental chatter, and superstition).
Some people claim they have talked to God, and I often wonder what God told them.

ya i talk to God and he talks to me , i am not christian neither religious and i do what i want , he told me his will is my will , and i am free as he is , it is by his power i am and will be forever , i am here to witness the wonder , participate and do wonders myself , God told me he is not a christian,jew,hindu,buddhists or anything of that sort , God told me he is above religion and expects me to be above religion too and he says the translation of holy books is poor at best and the intelligence of the religious community these days is most unreligious ,so pls dont belive in the religion of today , God told me a lot of things , (also 2+2=4 he told me , that is as far as my own intelligence goes
and will always go because i am just a monkey and its best i do more enthogens )

but above all he told me forget about trying to understand everything and
enjoy the moment
and chant

if anyone here wants to talk to God , he/she could first try starting talking to himself/herself , the road starts there and the road never ends for it never began , the sun always sets in the horizon , no one can touch it , the answer is as much within as much outside

and yes i don't really appreciate hawkings ideas , however we have to agree to disagree otherwise its mud wrestling and i have been there

ok pls forget about the post i just realised how stoned i am