Free will? What do you think? (Page 11)  one_two_x_u: ok cool - i'm doing my post grad in philosophy of science so i'll check it out. thanks!  lori100: I have some info on free will from Rudolf Steiner----I have a couple of dozen of books on his lectures that he gave all over the world, including at Yale and Oxford. . I felt from the start that this was an amazing man who really knew what he was talking about. -----Wikipedia----Rudolf Steiner----(25/27 February 1861[3] – 30 March 1925) was an Austrian philosopher, social reformer, ---architect, and esotericist.[4][5] Steiner gained initial recognition as a literary critic and cultural philosopher. At the beginning of the twentieth century, he founded a spiritual movement, anthroposophy, as an esoteric philosophy with roots in German idealist philosophy and theosophy. He developed a new artistic form, eurythmy and architecture, culminating in the building of the Goetheanum, a cultural centre to house all the arts. In the third phase of his work, beginning after World War I, Steiner worked to establish various practical endeavors, including Waldorf education, biodynamic agriculture, and anthroposophical medicine.[8] -------- At age 19, Steiner was asked to edit the works of Goethe. In 1888, as a result of his work for the Kürschner edition of Goethe's works, Steiner was invited to work as an editor at the Goethe archives in Weimar. Steiner remained with the archive until 1896. As well as the introductions for and commentaries to four volumes of Goethe's scientific writings, Steiner wrote two books about Goethe's philosophy: The Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe's World-Conception (1886),[20] which Steiner later regarded as the epistemological foundation and justification for every thing he had later said and published,[21] and Goethe's Conception of the World (1897).[22] During this time he also collaborated in complete editions of the works of Arthur Schopenhauer and the writer Jean Paul and wrote numerous articles for various journals. Albert Schweitzer wrote that he and Steiner had in common that they had "taken on the life mission of working for the emergence of a true culture enlivened by the ideal of humanity and to encourage people to become truly thinking beings". ---------------- On free will------With regard to freedom of the will, Steiner observes that a key question is how the will to action arises in the first place. Steiner describes to begin with two sources for human action: on the one hand, the driving forces springing from our natural being, from our instincts, feelings, and thoughts insofar as these are determined by our character - and on the other hand, various kinds of external motives we may adopt, including the dictates of abstract ethical or moral codes. In this way, both nature and culture bring forces to bear on our will and soul life. Overcoming these two elements, neither of which is individualized, we can achieve genuinely individualized intuitions that speak to the particular situation at hand. By overcoming a slavish or automatic response to the dictates of both our 'lower' drives and conventional morality, and by orchestrating a meeting place of objective and subjective elements of experience, we find the freedom to choose how to think and act.[7] ------------------ Steiner wrote: 'There are many who will say that the concept of the free man which I have here developed is a chimera nowhere to be found in practice; we have to do with actual human beings, from whom we can only hope for morality if they obey some moral law, that is, if they regard their moral task as a duty and do not freely follow their inclinations and loves. I do not doubt this at all. Only a blind man could do so. But if this is to be the final conclusion, then away with all this hypocrisy about morality! Let us then simply say that human nature must be driven to its actions as long as it is not free. Whether his unfreedom is forced on him by physical means or by moral laws, whether man is unfree because he follows his unlimited sexual desire or because he is bound by the fetters of conventional morality, is quite immaterial from a certain point of view...Only let us not assert that such a man can rightly call his actions his own, seeing that he is driven to them by a force other than himself.' (Edited by lori100) CoIin: Thanks Lori I'd never heard of Steiner before. Few things scare me as much as a German or Austrian metaphysician ( ) but he seems to hold that our freedom lies in individual originality - be different! Be like Boy George! I mean don't be like Boy George; I mean be LIKE Boy George. I mean be like him in being original, don't just copy the man Hang on, that doesn't work either  I mean be original like him, but not in the same way; be original like him in an original way    What do you like about him, Lori? lori100: I like that he was highly educated, had varied teachings including on spiritual matters, a respected philosopher, but developed practical ideas to improve education, agriculture, medicine. He taught people how to develop their higher senses to learn how to see in the spiritual worlds----with methods all can learn. He called it "Spiritual Science". Steiner emphasized that there is an objective natural and spiritual world that can be known, and that perceptions of the spiritual world and incorporeal beings are, under conditions of training comparable to that required for the natural sciences, including self-discipline, replicable by multiple observers. It is on this basis that spiritual science is possible, with radically different epistemological foundations than those of natural science. He traveled out of body, saw dead people since he was little. His life was threatened many times. -------wikipedia------In 1921, Adolf Hitler attacked Steiner in an article in the right-wing Völkischer Beobachter newspaper that included accusations that Steiner was a tool of the Jews,[32] and other nationalist extremists in Germany called up a "war against Steiner". That same year, Steiner warned against the disastrous effects it would have for central Europe if the National Socialists came to power. ------------------He stated he was aware of plots against him, but was forbidden to use his knowledge of the plots to save his own life----he became aware of the plots from his psychic senses that he developed to a high degree. The first Goetheanum he had built was destroyed by the Nazis. It was rebuilt. He was truly an amazing man who dedicated his life to educating humanity. (Edited by lori100) lori100: So...we seem to have somewhat limited free will.....btw, I liked your video by Dr. Kaku on free will, he also states the validity of ufo sightings by presidents, generals....he doesn't just dismiss what he doesn't understand.... CoIin: Well, to a large extent, whether or not we have free will depends not only on one's metaphysics (i.e. what kind of universe is this), but also what we MEAN by the terms "free will" or "freedom". First there are the dualists who hold that the mind (soul) is made of a different "stuff" from the body (see Dilbert cartoon earlier in the thread ). This is the traditional religious notion of free will.Among contemporary scientists and philosophers you might have difficulty finding a dualist. The notion appears to be incoherent and therefore indefensible. It's also entirely at odds with our current scientific understanding of how the brain works. The three dudes in the videos I posted earlier are all "determinists" which is to say they believe that ALL events are an inevitable outcome of causally sufficient antecedent events. This worldview leaves no room for the "fairy godmother" interventionist (i.e. not all events are determined) notion of free will held by the dualists. The dilemma for the determinist is, under such a worldview where EVERYTHING that happens is predetermined and in any situation you "could not have done otherwise", what does it mean to say we are free. The hard determinist's reply is "nothing" - we are not free. Free will is an illusion. The soft determinist, like the hard determinist, accepts that all events are determined by causal laws (i.e. their metaphysics are the same), but holds that we do have freedom insofar as all choices we make are a product of our character. This character, of course, is also determined purely by antecedent events over which we have no control.  lori100: Hey!! Don't disrespect the fairy godmother!!...She'll pass over you and sprinkle others with fairy dust! Well...you know I do believe in intervention by higher evolved beings , fairy or otherwise...  thor1112010: A lifeform cannot do or think anything without first making a choice. Someone else can't do it. See if someone else can make you pick up a fork without you first choosing to do it. If they could, you would have controlled will. | Philosophy Chat Room 11 People Chatting Similar Conversations |
. I've been so alone 
