some thoughts from Starbucks
www.blogmorning.blogspot.com
^ GO THERE.
Just spent 2 hours talking to brock and the starbucks guy about what has been debated about free will and choice and God on your blogging site. And it was entirely random too- or random in my mind. Or perhaps connected with our puppet strings from some greater plan, by some greater Being? Brock and I started talking about theology and debating the existence of God and the starbucks guy just jumps in like "im studying at the seminary. I'd love to join the conversation" and then he did. It was awesome. Real education. real dialogue. How there is a duality between our physical sense and our mental processes- synapses, neurons trigger physical responses, how our mental functionings create physical movement. And how we cannot ever make a conscious movement without our mental function knowing so beforehand. (the whole i say "i am moving my hand" but i can also not move it when I say it and vice versa.) How the choice to move the hand is not left up to us, but to our brain's responses to the body needing/wanting/feeling the force to do so. (define force gets into gray area- call it God, call it YikYak etc...) And once our brains have processed this response- the hand moves and within milliseconds- the action is completed. A physiological response is created after a psychological trigger. However, there is no free choice. We have no free will for every action is in that, a reaction from another. Scientifically, the whole premis that for every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction. This goes the same for human action, "choice." or this debated "free will." I do not choose to go school. I go because of other decisions which tell me to do so. I have paid to go to school, i am expected to be there, i am there to better my education... What I think is free will is actually tied to previous obligations and decisions. Thus, when one says in relation to God that "everything happens for a reason" they are correct. And when another says in relation to there being no God that everything still happens for a reason, it is ultimately correct as well. If we were to have an argument, I could choose to end it by hitting you across the face. This is a physical action (my decision) from a mental response (unconscious response) but with reason: to end the conversation or to prove my point. Though the action would seem to be of my own free will, the fictional argument between you and I would have triggered the response of striking you across the face. The action is not iniated with out first having reason. Free will can never happen solely on the basis of "i want to do this and there is no other reason for it." For every example, it can be negated because of previous events. Even in death. WHy did a person die? Well, scientifically, their heart stopped, the doctor made a mistake, he took his own life. All choices, all of a reason not of our own. Thus, everything does in fact happen for a reason- though we may not immediately be made aware of said reasons.
Since everything happens for a reason, i conclude that there is no free will. I cannot verily act upon my impulses with out reason. Each action is already attached, woven, strung as puppets if you will to something bigger. Call it what you will, God, the Universe, YikYak, some all knowing being that had already tied the events together. We cannot exist on pure logic, and we cannot exist and live based on pure emotion. Imagine a lifestyle of singularly either. Acting on each humanistic emotion- no balance of emotional highs, or depressive lows. Just- happiness- then sexual desire- then impulsivity. (this has happened, and example of a man who had his limbic system operating separate from the rest of his brain. Thus he could act only on the hormones created by the limbic system.) Then imagine a life of pure logic. I must do this because it is logical. It is what is/ should be/has been done before.
Though there is the duality between the mental and physical, a relying, lean on me, type of relationship there also exists a third existence within the self: the soul. The soul cannot be seen nor explained, however it has connection to both the physical and the mental. The best "tangible" example of the soul is the connection of human relationships. The relationships between humans is the most tangible proof of the soul. Synchronity between women in their menstrual cycles, how over a spent amount of time together people can begin to finish each other's sentences, how a mother knows something is wrong even before her child says something is. Even how when we have been around a person so much we begin to develop traits of theirs and mold them into our own being subconsciously. If we accept that we dream, that we have a subsconscious existence, we can also except that there is a soul- a connection to the divine. (However there is no proven reason for why we dream. There are theories, but no laws which say a dream exists to dot dot dot... It used to be said that we dream and sleep in order to recooperate our minds, and our brain activity. But look at the Dalai Lama, he can exists on minimal sleep for days, even months at a time.) A divine which knows us, knows our "choices" and gives us each other to fill in the blanks. (like a choose your own story book. Each page is left to us to decide where the Princess will go- turn to page 10 to meet the evil witch, or page 14 to see the prince) but ultimately all pages turn toward the same ending.
Free will has been debated on your bloggy for some time. And I still feel as if I have no intellectual thought to share. Perhaps people are so readily to deny the existence of God because there is no empircial evidence to say it is here, or it is there. One may quote the Bible saying "the kingdom of God does not come with careful observation, nor will they say 'here it is' or 'there it is' because the kingdom of God is within you." (Luke 17:22) AH- he is within US... what does that mean? how can we understand the existence of a greater power if we do not even understand our own existence? our own consciousness? Or one may choose to quote the Tao Te Ching saying- "look it cannot be seen- it is beyond form, listen it cannot be heard- it is beyond sound. Grasp it cannot be held- it is intanglible..." If it is intangible, cannot be seen, cannot be heard, cannot be grasped, who is to say it is even there? Eh...
Whatever you choose to define it as, there is in fact, no set definition for God. And since we have been trained to rely on our senses for explaination of why things are the way they are- an abstract existence OF this GOD GUY is absurd. However, if we believe in the connection of physical and mental without ever SEEING, GRASPING, HEARING the processes, why is it so far a stretch to believe the existence of a third entity: the SOUL. The connection to the Divine. The connection to God/Buddha/Muhammed/or the Blog God also known as YikYak.In Hindu mythology there are references to Indra's net. A net described to hold a pearl and each pearl reflects that of the other. Symbolic that all life connects. Where in one jewel is that of the other for they share the same image- likeness- yet exist singularly as one, individual atom, in space and in time. They are all intrinsically connected yet isolated and separate. Or even in Whitman's "Spider" those "isolate, surrounded detached in measureless ocean of space." SEEKING THE SPHERES to connect them. So that the thread may catch somewhere. The SOUL. And where is the science behind this? Where is the empirical evidence? the Hard data and facts? Why quantam physics....In the Hadron Bootstrap Theory physicist Geoffrey Chew claims that the universe exists as a dynamic web of connections of events. Each parts of the web are not singular in form. They exist as one, separate being, yet echo from the properties of all the other parts of the "web", and the entire being of relying upon each other is based upon their mutual interrelations and thus, this determines the structure of the said web.
Denying the existence of the soul is to deny that life has meaning. Deny that human existence is for more than just the purpose of ejaculation for procreation. Hinduism believes in a fluid universe (karma, cycles, wheels, etc...) Buddhishm focuses on the intellectual connection to reach spiritaul enlightenment. "Acintya" or translated as the "unthinkable" whereas what is separate in reality, physical existence, is actually interconnected and whole and undivided.
The denial of connection to something higher- is in fact, rather uneducated. For the truths are right before the eyes, the senses, though God can not be graphed or measured.
Just this evenings thoughts.
FYI: did you know that the parables written in greek had their own separate tense rather than past, present, future, thus, the reign of 1000 in revelations could have very well came before the 4 hoursemen or vice verse. or simulataneously. and that, there is no way to translate this to english.
ALSO; the meek shall inherit the earth- "meek" comes from a word that is not translatable to enlish. The word actually means "a horse which is reigned back in preparation for war...." doesn't sound meek to me.
puts a spin on the whole "the meek shall inherit the earth" if you change it to the horse prepared for war shall inherit the earth.
^ GO THERE.
Just spent 2 hours talking to brock and the starbucks guy about what has been debated about free will and choice and God on your blogging site. And it was entirely random too- or random in my mind. Or perhaps connected with our puppet strings from some greater plan, by some greater Being? Brock and I started talking about theology and debating the existence of God and the starbucks guy just jumps in like "im studying at the seminary. I'd love to join the conversation" and then he did. It was awesome. Real education. real dialogue. How there is a duality between our physical sense and our mental processes- synapses, neurons trigger physical responses, how our mental functionings create physical movement. And how we cannot ever make a conscious movement without our mental function knowing so beforehand. (the whole i say "i am moving my hand" but i can also not move it when I say it and vice versa.) How the choice to move the hand is not left up to us, but to our brain's responses to the body needing/wanting/feeling the force to do so. (define force gets into gray area- call it God, call it YikYak etc...) And once our brains have processed this response- the hand moves and within milliseconds- the action is completed. A physiological response is created after a psychological trigger. However, there is no free choice. We have no free will for every action is in that, a reaction from another. Scientifically, the whole premis that for every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction. This goes the same for human action, "choice." or this debated "free will." I do not choose to go school. I go because of other decisions which tell me to do so. I have paid to go to school, i am expected to be there, i am there to better my education... What I think is free will is actually tied to previous obligations and decisions. Thus, when one says in relation to God that "everything happens for a reason" they are correct. And when another says in relation to there being no God that everything still happens for a reason, it is ultimately correct as well. If we were to have an argument, I could choose to end it by hitting you across the face. This is a physical action (my decision) from a mental response (unconscious response) but with reason: to end the conversation or to prove my point. Though the action would seem to be of my own free will, the fictional argument between you and I would have triggered the response of striking you across the face. The action is not iniated with out first having reason. Free will can never happen solely on the basis of "i want to do this and there is no other reason for it." For every example, it can be negated because of previous events. Even in death. WHy did a person die? Well, scientifically, their heart stopped, the doctor made a mistake, he took his own life. All choices, all of a reason not of our own. Thus, everything does in fact happen for a reason- though we may not immediately be made aware of said reasons.
Since everything happens for a reason, i conclude that there is no free will. I cannot verily act upon my impulses with out reason. Each action is already attached, woven, strung as puppets if you will to something bigger. Call it what you will, God, the Universe, YikYak, some all knowing being that had already tied the events together. We cannot exist on pure logic, and we cannot exist and live based on pure emotion. Imagine a lifestyle of singularly either. Acting on each humanistic emotion- no balance of emotional highs, or depressive lows. Just- happiness- then sexual desire- then impulsivity. (this has happened, and example of a man who had his limbic system operating separate from the rest of his brain. Thus he could act only on the hormones created by the limbic system.) Then imagine a life of pure logic. I must do this because it is logical. It is what is/ should be/has been done before.
Though there is the duality between the mental and physical, a relying, lean on me, type of relationship there also exists a third existence within the self: the soul. The soul cannot be seen nor explained, however it has connection to both the physical and the mental. The best "tangible" example of the soul is the connection of human relationships. The relationships between humans is the most tangible proof of the soul. Synchronity between women in their menstrual cycles, how over a spent amount of time together people can begin to finish each other's sentences, how a mother knows something is wrong even before her child says something is. Even how when we have been around a person so much we begin to develop traits of theirs and mold them into our own being subconsciously. If we accept that we dream, that we have a subsconscious existence, we can also except that there is a soul- a connection to the divine. (However there is no proven reason for why we dream. There are theories, but no laws which say a dream exists to dot dot dot... It used to be said that we dream and sleep in order to recooperate our minds, and our brain activity. But look at the Dalai Lama, he can exists on minimal sleep for days, even months at a time.) A divine which knows us, knows our "choices" and gives us each other to fill in the blanks. (like a choose your own story book. Each page is left to us to decide where the Princess will go- turn to page 10 to meet the evil witch, or page 14 to see the prince) but ultimately all pages turn toward the same ending.
Free will has been debated on your bloggy for some time. And I still feel as if I have no intellectual thought to share. Perhaps people are so readily to deny the existence of God because there is no empircial evidence to say it is here, or it is there. One may quote the Bible saying "the kingdom of God does not come with careful observation, nor will they say 'here it is' or 'there it is' because the kingdom of God is within you." (Luke 17:22) AH- he is within US... what does that mean? how can we understand the existence of a greater power if we do not even understand our own existence? our own consciousness? Or one may choose to quote the Tao Te Ching saying- "look it cannot be seen- it is beyond form, listen it cannot be heard- it is beyond sound. Grasp it cannot be held- it is intanglible..." If it is intangible, cannot be seen, cannot be heard, cannot be grasped, who is to say it is even there? Eh...
Whatever you choose to define it as, there is in fact, no set definition for God. And since we have been trained to rely on our senses for explaination of why things are the way they are- an abstract existence OF this GOD GUY is absurd. However, if we believe in the connection of physical and mental without ever SEEING, GRASPING, HEARING the processes, why is it so far a stretch to believe the existence of a third entity: the SOUL. The connection to the Divine. The connection to God/Buddha/Muhammed/or the Blog God also known as YikYak.In Hindu mythology there are references to Indra's net. A net described to hold a pearl and each pearl reflects that of the other. Symbolic that all life connects. Where in one jewel is that of the other for they share the same image- likeness- yet exist singularly as one, individual atom, in space and in time. They are all intrinsically connected yet isolated and separate. Or even in Whitman's "Spider" those "isolate, surrounded detached in measureless ocean of space." SEEKING THE SPHERES to connect them. So that the thread may catch somewhere. The SOUL. And where is the science behind this? Where is the empirical evidence? the Hard data and facts? Why quantam physics....In the Hadron Bootstrap Theory physicist Geoffrey Chew claims that the universe exists as a dynamic web of connections of events. Each parts of the web are not singular in form. They exist as one, separate being, yet echo from the properties of all the other parts of the "web", and the entire being of relying upon each other is based upon their mutual interrelations and thus, this determines the structure of the said web.
Denying the existence of the soul is to deny that life has meaning. Deny that human existence is for more than just the purpose of ejaculation for procreation. Hinduism believes in a fluid universe (karma, cycles, wheels, etc...) Buddhishm focuses on the intellectual connection to reach spiritaul enlightenment. "Acintya" or translated as the "unthinkable" whereas what is separate in reality, physical existence, is actually interconnected and whole and undivided.
The denial of connection to something higher- is in fact, rather uneducated. For the truths are right before the eyes, the senses, though God can not be graphed or measured.
Just this evenings thoughts.
FYI: did you know that the parables written in greek had their own separate tense rather than past, present, future, thus, the reign of 1000 in revelations could have very well came before the 4 hoursemen or vice verse. or simulataneously. and that, there is no way to translate this to english.
ALSO; the meek shall inherit the earth- "meek" comes from a word that is not translatable to enlish. The word actually means "a horse which is reigned back in preparation for war...." doesn't sound meek to me.
puts a spin on the whole "the meek shall inherit the earth" if you change it to the horse prepared for war shall inherit the earth.