Does free will exist?

[Faceless]

9 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

BE-ing is not encapsulated by thought-stories.

Yeah, thought cannot touch upon that which is TRUTH/reality, I said that. 

I didn’t ask about your systems, I was asking if you saw that thought was old, of the past. And that thought is not free, and is determined. Again relatively. 

Edited June 28, 2018 by Faceless

[Faceless]

You have gone into the nature of thought I assume, right? 

[Faceless]

I mean we can say that ones nuanced conceptual systems are only as orderly as one’s order of thinking right? 

Edited June 28, 2018 by Faceless

[NoSelfSelf]

Why in christinity they say there is a free will so there could be a sinner confusing ...?

[tsuki]

@Joseph Maynor @Faceless Knowing has various meanings. Don't get too hung up on ambiguity.
From the perspective of Existential Truth (in Joseph's philosophy), all words have no meaning and are hardpoints that attach models to experience.
Models being structure between words that give possibility for experience to be tangible.

Edited June 28, 2018 by tsuki

[metwinn]

@pluto but who is actually making the decisions? You are merely watching the "decisions" made from my point of view. Even if you were the "person" making the decisions that decision still has a cause behind it.

Edited June 28, 2018 by metwinn

[tsuki]

@K VIL Me neither . It doesn't mean that I'm trolling you though.

[metwinn]

@Faceless

7 hours ago, Faceless said:

Right, free-will ultimately implies there is no freedom at all, But when we cease to act according to will/thought, which is not free, there is FREEDOM. 

Not sure I can fully wrap my head around your monstrous post, can you simplify what your trying to say here so my tiny brain can understand as I think we have finally reached some sort of middle ground 

[Faceless]

4 hours ago, tsuki said:

@Joseph Maynor @Faceless Knowing has various meanings. Don't get too hung up on ambiguity.
From the perspective of Existential Truth (in Joseph's philosophy), all words have no meaning and are hardpoints that attach models to experience.
Models being structure between words that give possibility for experience to be tangible.

Indeed, words/thought cannot touch TRUTH. 

But communicate we use words, to points to something. And yes thought/words are imposed on to a experiencing, which implies an experience. 

 

But I was referring thought itslelf, and usiing thought to communicate. 

 

And philosophy (of thought) has noting to do with “TRUTH”...This is obvious. But we are simply communicating, or that is the point is here. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 28, 2018 by Faceless

[Faceless]

3 hours ago, metwinn said:

@Faceless

Not sure I can fully wrap my head around your monstrous post, can you simplify what your trying to say here so my tiny brain can understand as I think we have finally reached some sort of middle ground 

Have you gone into the nature of thinking and its relationship with the self? 

Edited June 28, 2018 by Faceless

[metwinn]

43 minutes ago, Faceless said:

Have you gone into the nature of thinking and its relationship with the self? 

@Faceless @metwinnit depends how you define the self.

[Faceless]

Just now, metwinn said:

@Faceless @metwinnit depends how you define the self.

The you, the i, the accumulation of experience, knowledge, memory

Edited June 28, 2018 by Faceless

[Faceless]

Without all of that, would you know who you are as the self?

Edited June 28, 2018 by Faceless

[metwinn]

@Faceless @metwinnyou mean the mind? 

[Faceless]

Just now, metwinn said:

@Faceless @metwinnyou mean the mind? 

If you had no capacity to recollect past experience, knowledge, through memory would you know who you are? 

[metwinn]

@Faceless no, but that does not mean that I am not 

[metwinn]

@Faceless you are making the mistake of believing that you are whare you perceive 

[Faceless]

4 minutes ago, metwinn said:

@Faceless no, but that does not mean that I am not 

I’m not understanding your response. 

 

1 minute ago, metwinn said:

@Faceless you are making the mistake of believing that you are whare you perceive 

Not talking about belief. I am asking if there is no capacity to remember then you don’t know who you are as an ego. Right?

[metwinn]

@Faceless correct but what is your point?

Edited June 28, 2018 by metwinn

[Faceless]

1 minute ago, metwinn said:

@Faceless correct 

So experience, knowledge, memory forms the self/ego, you see that?