Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Mike Kay's avatar

The endless demands for free will to be the reigning paradigm are really rooted in a primitive, semi-conscious metaphysic. There is a deep need to assign blame and derision within this rude thinking which translates into either praise or condemnation. None of this works without free will.

From this point free will then is defined according to its opposite, even though free will is a rather ridiculous proposition, and because our society is obsessed with blame and profit it seems to make a kind of dysfunctional sense.

If we were observers of nature, we would be thinking about free will in the context of natural forces. We would set down a need to force an explanation and pick up a more sophisticated understanding that is based upon the actions of the various kingdoms that populate this place, such as the botanical. We would then view notions of choice and decision as facets of conditions rather than as some absolute ideal.

If we actually tried to do this or something similar it would open the gates to an entirely different, and I might add potentially rewarding human experience.

Expand full comment

No posts