I guess you did not understand my examples. We are responsible for what is in the subconscious mind. The only reason it exists is because we manifested it. It is where all the information is stored that we cannot consciously assimilate. It is information storage and it can be called into service an any time.

As for your accepted authorities, I am not familiar with their philosophies and I don't care about their credentials. They are probably working from the same level of understanding that you are.

Everytime you don't understand what I am saying you resort to calling it "illogical." From your object level it probably is. Your premise is grounded in the objective physical universe. Because of this it is almost pointless to discuss these things.\

What you think about me is none of my business.

I never said anything about you.



Your continued belief that denying free will somehow means no responsibility is illogical. I thought we were past that point.

I know you did not say anything about me. That is just a figure of speech. Sorry.

Why would you deny that you have free will if not to blame something or someone else for your state of affairs?

Like I said, it is only illogical in your opinion and from your objective physical point of view. It is not the way I see it.

That you think it is illogical is none of my business. That is your opinion and comes from your point of view which is the objective physical universe that you believe is reality. From that point of view, I agree, it would be seen as illogical.

I will answer this question again since you don't get my other response.

The will is free.

Humans have the ability to use their will, or they can refuse to use it and allow themselves to be the effect and be influenced and affected by everything and they claim that they are not responsible for what they do or think because they are bombarded with all these influences to include the subconscious mind, and they have no free will because of this.



It does not mean "no responsibility." It means you don't want to accept all of the responsibility for your actions.

Sure you might accept 'some' of the responsibility for your conscious decisions that you remember and think about, but not for anything else.

You will not accept responsibility for your 'unconscious' decisions and actions or subconscious influenced decisions and actions because you believe that you are not responsible for those.

Why do you believe you are not responsible for those? Because you can't remember them, or because you blame influences for them.

"My subconscious mind made me decide to do it."

But I am telling you that if you want freedom you must accept responsibility for everything that you do and think. So if you want to say you have "no free will" or that there is no such thing as free will then it is because you do not want to accept responsibility for everything you do and think. You want to blame it on influences, programing, genes, DNA, and the subconscious mind.

You can have free will if you realize that you are 100% responsible for what you do and think, whether you remember it or the reasons for it or not; and no matter what or who influenced you.

one could believe in determinism and be an atheist from a spiritual rather than a religious perspective
from one point of view although we are physically separate entities, spiritually we are one presence
this one presence is your determiner

i believe it is rather more complicated than that and that both determinism and free will are illusory human concepts that have no basis in reality

in the case of free will it is impossible to say, as we can never be certain what initiates an individual to make a decision. i may believe i am acting under my own authority and be unaware of unconscious conditioning or repressed desires

as for determinism, spiritually, why would we be here doing what we are doing, learning what we are, if we already knew the answers? in religion there is no place for determinism as the concept of free will is paramount.

i believe reality is an ever expanding awareness, the thought or idea in motion. of which our universe is an illusion. this awareness has no free will to move in any particular direction as it moves in all directions simultaneously. the only determined factor is movement

the term 'free will' implies a will that is free to choose.
subconscious desires or conditioned responses are not freely chosen

we can accept full responsibility without the belief in free will

Quietman I thought we spoke of things like this earlier. In the conditions we can now control time is linear and finite, meaning it goes from point A to B and converges to some readable or predictable value, however, when things approach the speed of light and faster, time is experienced differently and thus it is not linear as delta t from A to B is now shorter and as such demonstrating a bent or parabolic graph rather than a linear and constant graph, so you contradict yourself.

JB,

Knowing that the human will has determining factors does not negate one's responsibility for their choices. It allows a greater understanding of them. Your entrenched in a belief system that holds the human will as one's power for self-direction, and I would not disagree. That is true. However, that does not make one's choices or thinking exist without outside inluence. Thinking that all that happens to one in their life is a direct cause of some choice they made themself is itself a belief in determinism. Knowing that that choice was perceived as the best one by the person allows us to investigate why that is so. Why was it considered to be the best choice? It is the closest thing to having a free will that humans can attain, unless every decision and choice were made without thinking about it.

I understood them, I just do not agree with your logic.



That is an unbelievable claim. There is no evidence which suggests that we 'manifested' our unconscious mind anymore than we 'manifested' the tree held in our perception. That belief requires huge unverifiable assumptions. We are responsible for *some* of what is in the subconscious mind, but unless we are responsible for everything else that exists independently of our minds that has been perceived, we cannot possibly be responsible for all of it.



What you are not understanding here is the fact that the reason it is called the 'subconscious' is because everything contained within it exists and interacts with our conscious perception in a way which is outside of our conscious awareness. We cannot just 'call it into service at any time'. If that were true, we would be able to remember everything at will, whenever we chose.

That is obviously untrue.



Fair enough, it was a fallacious form of argument on my behalf anyway.



That is not true. I call things illogical if the argument is invalid, and that assessment, assuming it is correct, requires the argument being understood.



To enable the ability to gain a more accurate understanding of reality.

Knowing that the human will is influenced(which you previously agreed with yet are not factoring into your thoughts here) allows us to be able to more accurately assess it and it's independently existing influencing factors. It allows a greater understanding than just believing that one thinks and chooses in a manner which is completely free from outside influence.



Tell me then, where did you get the idea that we manifest reality with our thoughts and are completely responsible for all that lies in the subconscious mind? I know from reading you that the new-aged idea called the Law Of Attraction plays a significant role in your current thinking. It's influence has also been evident in your expressed interpretations of perception.

Are you responsible for it's existence?

Do you recognize what already existed in your belief system that that idea confirmed or agreed with? Do you kno9w why you believe it?



A standard subjectivist fallacy. My opinion, nor yours, is the focus here. What grounds those opinions rest their validity upon are.



Oh, I got it. Evidently you do not get that...



That has yet to be established. There has been plenty of evidence given by you and me both which suggests otherwise.



Your suggesting that using the will removes the effects of outside influence, and not using it renders one 'helpless' to those influences? Doesn't that idea necessarily require the acknowledgement of influence upon the will?

In other words, according to the above, in order to use the will, one must first recognize that it is being influenced?



Again, unconscious decisions do not exist. I have already proven why that is so. Please, if you insist on saying this, go back and show me where that argument failed to prove it. I would like to get out of this circle.

Understanding the subconcious mind includes knowing that there are outside influences upon it. Recognizing that that is the case is not denying responsibility for conscious actions. There are also necessary influences upon the conscious mind as well. That is a given, because much of what exists in the subconscious begins in a conscious state.

One can believe in free will and not accept responsibility for their actions. A correct assessment of personal responsibility requires an accurate causal understanding. A belief in free will does not garauntee that. I could make a case which supports otherwise.



Why do you believe that I think that way? Open your mind and read what I am saying here.





Accurately assessing that which influences human behavior allows one a greater understanding. With greater understanding comes greater responsibility for that which is being understood.

All disbelief in 'free' will does not have the same motivating factors. Open up your mind and allow yourself to believe that your making a mistake in thought here. I have made it clear how and why that is the case more than once.



Accepting responsibility does not constitute sufficient reason to believe in the existence of a 'free' will. Believing in 'free' will necessarily denies the existence of influences upon it.

Not if the Universe is multidimensional and not if the many universes theory is true.

I don't define "free" will as choices or thinking without outside influence. So I don't disagree with the above.



I did not say I do not believe in determinism. I see it as the law of cause and effect in this universe. If it were not for these laws we would have no control at all over anything.

If we had no will, we could not be cause. We would be like part of the machine and like robots. Our will and our conscious choice are cause within a deterministic universe. We can effect outcomes.

To some, determinism is the idea that your free conscious choices are a futility because you are going to end up someplace according to outside influences or "fate" that you have no control over.

If you are making a free and conscious choice, the laws of cause and effect and law of attraction will be your tools and will take you to a determined outcome but you will be the guiding cause of that, not outside influences. You are the determiner. You are the decider. That is your free will.



I agree that our 'free' will is determined by how aware we are and by how well we perceive and interpret our surroundings. It is determined by how conscious we are.

Humans begin to develop their (conscious) use of the will when they become more aware (conscious) of their reality. The less conscious you are the more you are going to be influenced by everything and everyone else.

This is something to think about because it means that the more conscious and aware you are of any situation and the possible outcomes involved the more power you have to influence others and outcomes. A person like this has more 'free' will than others simply because he is aware of influences that affect himself and others.

There is a new show on television called "The Mentalist." This is a good example of a person whose powers of observation are used as a tool to accomplish his job. It is a good objective example of a person who is very conscious.

Well then, outside of inconsistencies in how you arrive at your conclusions, I think that we agree here. I wondered throughout this discussion why it seemed that way regarding the influences upon one's will.

It seems that the difference that remains involves the use of the term 'free'. To me it seems inapplicable, but I find no value in believing my choices are 'free'. It seems to me that you find a great value in the recognition that the will is influenced, and that that recognition alone constitutes 'freedom' from influence. I suggest that while the recognition of influence is very valuable, it does nothing to free us from continued influence. It does allow us the awareness to consider these things more.

6 to one, half-dozen to the other...

Why do you insist upon calling it 'free' though? Why is that term held with such a high regard?

True objective logic. (And I said "subconscious mind" not Unconscious mind.) If you insist on object logic only, you will not find universal truth. (My opinion.)



I did not say it was easy, I am saying that it is possible. It takes the will to focus attention in that direction. It is done via hypnotism too.



Yes I know why I believe it.


What I am saying is that I do understand why you are calling my thinking "illogical." I understand your objective point of view. I am not saying it is not correct.



Humans have the ability to use their will, or they can refuse to use it and allow themselves to be the effect and be influenced and affected by everything and they claim that they are not responsible for what they do or think because they are bombarded with all these influences to include the subconscious mind, and they have no free will because of this.

The mind is influenced. The will (in its raw form) first surfaces as a desire. (A child desires a toy and will proceed to do what he thinks he has to do to acquire it including throwing a tantrum or crying. As we grow and become more aware, we discover more efficient ways to get what we want. A person obsessed will many times get or achieve what he wants simply because he obsessed and being so, he keeps his attention on the thing he is obsessed about. This does not require that he recognize that he is being influenced by anything and it does not require that he know why he is obsessed.

In the Tarot the raw use of the will is the energy of the Fool who is focused on what he wants and is clueless to the pitfalls and perils of the world and its influences. On the other hand, the Magician knows the proper use of the will and he has more control and he is aware of the pitfalls and influences and he uses the will in a more conscious and purposeful manner.



You have not proven that is so. Decisions that you make that you are unconscious of making are ones that are done automatically without much thought. They do exist. I am using the term "unconscious" because you may not be consciously aware of them at the time. Example: Like where I put my car keys when I came home. I did make that decision on some level, but I did not pay attention to it.



I don't disagree with the above.



One can claim they believe in "free" will but if they do not accept responsibility for their actions (all of them) and if they blame someone or something else then they are not accepting that they have free will in all cases.




I agree.



You have not made it clear otherwise I would understand it.



The existence of the will, which is our power of self direction, and our power of choice, is part of the package in accepting responsibility for our thoughts and actions. It does not deny the existence of influences. The will exists whether we are aware of influences or not, as in the case of a child where the will arises in raw form as a desire and the volition to act in order to obtain the thing wanted.

One can use their will and still not accept responsibility for their actions.

I don't insist on calling if "Free." That is why I always put the word "Free" in quotations. I am totally against the commonly used term "Free Will." I have always over and over stated that the will is just the will!

It is everyone else who foists the term "Free Will" upon me and everyone! I have always said it is a silly argument. The term "free" implies that "the will" is normally in bondage or normally totally controlled by something which is absurd.

Are you denying writing this, or have you changed your mind? The last few pages of arguments given by you deny it.



You have given good reason to conlude that it does not have to be 100% programming in order to be contingent upon outside influences... therefore not free. Using the will, as described by you, requires recognizing that it is not free.

No I am not denying that I said that. I am talking to people who insist on using the term "free will" when they should just use the term THE WILL.

There is no reason to question whether or not it is "free."

The will is just the will. It is either used or it is not used.
If it were up to me I would never ever use the term "free will" because that term implies that the will is something that can be in bondage or completely controlled. The only reason I even use the term "free" is because people insist on using that term and I am attempting to communicate with them with their terms, since they seem to just ignore me when I say that the term "free will" implies that the will could be in bondage.

I have stated this many times. People who tack the term "free" to the will, are people who don't understand what the will is.

Take a child who is exercising his will towards something he wants for example. He just does it. He just takes actions towards the thing he wants even if he cannot get it. He keeps his attention on it. He might scream and cry for it. He may never get it, but his will to have it is there and he is exercising that will. There is no question about that. No one can suppress his desire for what he wants. They can make him shut up, but if he is determined, they will not suppress his desire for what he wants. That is his will in action. They can try to distract him with something else but ultimately it is up to the child if he decides to get distracted and forget about what he wants. That is his power and that is his will.

It is not a question about whether or not he can actually get what he wants or do what he wants; it is a question of him choosing what he wants and keeping his attention on that.

Of course it is naturally "free." To question that is silly. To question that implies it could be controlled or completely programed into him as if he were a robot and had no will at all.

The will is the power to choose, regardless of influences. It is the power to program ourselves and to direct ourselves. It is the power to have preferences. It is the power to decide. You have that power regardless of influences and regardless if you are even aware of any influences. Yes you can be manipulated, but you allow it by what you choose.

No matter what the influences, ultimately you have the power to choose what you want and the will to do so, whether or not you get what you want. You have to power to place your attention and thoughts and intentions where you want. This is the power to initiate THOUGHT in the direction you choose.

It is the difference between a computer's thinking and a human's thinking. A computer does not 'desire' anything. A human does. A computer does not create things or imagine things. A human does. A computer does not think, it only processes data and follows programming. It has no will. There is no question if a computer has "free will" because a computer has NO WILL AT ALL.

A human has a will and it is the power to choose, desire, think, imagine etc. It is either used or it is not used, but the potential is always there.

The will is the potential to direct your own thoughts and actions, to program yourself, to decide what you want, to decide where to place your attention. Whether or not you are conscious enough to use it makes no difference. But even a child knows how to express what he wants and go after it.

I don't know of any example of a living person who does not have a will or does not use it other than perhaps an unconscious body being kept alive by machines.

You either have one or, like a computer, you don't have one. If you are alive, you have will.

The will is potential. The potential to choose.

So you're saying that it is always free, and therefore should not be questioned? Do you think that we have a choice in what we want?

Free is not the word. Is Potential free? It simply exists.

Yes we do have a choice in what we want. But mostly the will is the potential to choose, whether we choose or not. It is the potential to think whether we think or not. It is the potential to decide whether we decide or not. Some will allow others to make these choices for them by choice.