Free Will

[synderon]

This post is coming a couple hours later than I intended it. I've been pretty caught up in playing FF VII lately. Also before I get into this I would like to say I don't really like to proof read the things I write, my grammar probably isn't the best, and I may at times arrange my thoughts in odd ways... so deal with it. I would also like to say

Comments

My Thoughts...Pt. 2

[zovick_84]

I realize that I am getting a bit off topic here, but you asked for my thoughts, so you get them, even if they aren't completely related to the topic at hand. The problem with personality theory is that it is difficult to try and find a theory of personality that works on the broad scale that can be applied to people in general, and also one the explains the actions of individual people. When most people think about personality, they think about individuals. how does this person act? Whey are they doing this specific thing? But personality also includes questions of how humans in general act. For example, whether or not man is inherently good or evil is not only a question of philosophy, but a question of personality. Why do people in general act the way they do? The three schools of thought on this are:

-- The Freudian model, that humans have an inherently evil personality
-- The Rogrerian model, that human beings have an inherently good personality
-- The behaviorist model, that human beings are inherently a blank slate and can be molded to have either a good or evil personality

I guess what it comes down to is which of these camps you fall into as far as a macro theory of personality. The interesting tension that I have never quite resolved is that as far as the tabula rasa theory, it includes the idea that we have the ability to shape our own personality, which I've already stated I agree with, I think we have to be careful in assuming we are too much in control of our own lives. But that gets into doctrine that I'm not allowed to talk about. But like I said, there is no theory that can explain the inherent state of humanity, but then also explain why certain individuals clearly act in opposition to that inherent state.

Personality is a biopsychosocial construct. It clearly involves aspects of biology and heredity, sociology, the world around us and our experiences, and our internal motives, thoughts, and desires. It is in that last area where I would argue free will gets involved. We have choices, and we can alter our personality.

Well, thats it for now...I hope I didn't get too off topic. Please everyone, feel free to reply, question, argue whatever. Lets get a good discussion going.

-- Dave

Re: My Thoughts...Pt. 2

[synderon]

While I didn't include it in my post, personal tastes, interests, and ethics also affect decisions. These along with personality compromise the "self". When I visualize this concept I think of a planet. There is a solid inner core of traits that are unchangeable. After that is a gradient of various layers until you get to the crust. The crust is the part of your self you make visible. It is superficial and can be the most easily changed for whatever situation you are in. You can present your self in any manner that would be most beneficial to you. Events in your life (meteorites I guess in this analogy?) that change you personality can only change it so deep, it's not going to affect the core.