Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

47262RE: [existlist] Freedom versus determinism

Expand Messages
  • nr_rajkumar
    Mar 3, 2009
      I have just finished a bit of a heavy reading of some of the back references left by Chris Lofting on the web.  I am now inclined to think of the possibilities as immense but the limited capability stands in the way of refining, sharpening the processes and procedures to come to grips with precise reality of the moment and retain the focus - whether it is "out there" or "in here" - and allow a meaningful relationship to develop  between them. 
      The thermodynamic time and space giving way to light and precision, the complexities, the oscillations, the yin/yang, A/Not A, the context, metaphors, the expressions they all narrow down to participation with involvement and detachment as well as it comes nearer home and to a single chain of unbroken consciousness, interpretations and potential possibilities. There is so much happening in the objective world, the subjective world and the subjective self that go under the label of  acceptance and rejection and selection and treatment - the choice available to the individual self in search of variety and certainty, in the face of the ordering and dialogue that is taking place as expression of cause and effect chain/relationship to be meaningful implies that devices representing the phenomenon of ordering, control and performance must share linear,  cohesive or purposeful or opposite relationships.

      --- On Sun, 3/1/09, chris lofting <lofting@...> wrote:

      From: chris lofting <lofting@...>
      Subject: RE: [existlist] Freedom versus determinism
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 7:50 AM

      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: existlist@yahoogrou ps.com
      > [mailto:existlist@yahoogrou ps.com] On Behalf Of devogney
      > Sent: Sunday, 1 March 2009 12:38 PM
      > To: existlist@yahoogrou ps.com
      > Subject: [existlist] Freedom versus determinism
      > I recall a few weeks or so ago the question of freedom versus
      > determinism was being discussed here. Someone said that you
      > couldn't have it both ways. I believe we are free to have it
      > both ways. I believe it is empowering to be able to have more
      > than one paradigm through which to perceive life.

      Sure - you can work as a particular of the species and process information
      etc as a genetically- determined being OR as a singular being, 'free' to make
      choices (to a degree, your singular being is always operating WITHIN the
      bounds set by the biology).

      Consider consciousness as an agent of mediation in LOCAL contexts and that
      includes serving as a 'randomiser' of the set of behaviours available; as
      such consciousness can let you escape false reasoning by being intentionally
      'irrational' . We can interpret this as consciousness manifesting Darwin's
      mutation now internalised and working 24/7.

      > I think
      > that for some endeavors determisism can be a paradigm that
      > allows us to perceive directions and progressions. Whereas in
      > many other areas of life, the paradigm of freedom is a more
      > empowering mode. I understand in quantum physics, that in one
      > mode the universe can be seen as one energy wave, and in
      > another mode it is seen as particles.

      This is a product of methodology where we cover precision vs approximation
      in the context of acts of mediation. As such HOW you observe determines WHAT
      you observe. Nothing magical about that once you understand the dynamics of
      meaning derivation in the presence of indeterminacy. The wave/particle
      duality issue is built-in to our methods of processing information and so
      will appear in experiments that touch on such in high precision across the
      microcosm, mesocosm, macrocosm. QM has been demanding of our intellects and
      so we project all possible forms of interpretation onto our experiments and
      then get surprised with the findings where such reflect more a failure to
      understand our methodology in processing information.

      > I believe the freedom to have things both ways, or maybe even
      > three or four ways is very much a part of the evolution of
      > human freedom itself.

      ? consciousness actually LIMITS freedom buy reducing the degrees of freedom
      available - it serves to suppress/repress and as such covers top-down
      dynamics of regulation to aid in making the 'best fit' choices. Since the
      brain can only deal with 7+/-2 concepts at the same time, so as we work
      through choices we drop some to pick up others - given lots of others this
      can be experienced consciously as lots of choices being available - and if
      one is ignorant of unconscious activity then a spanner can be thrown into
      the works very quickly.

      Our more differentiating parts of the brain work of probabilistic thinking,
      subjective probabilities (Bayesian statistics), high risk, partials focus,
      anti-symmetric. The subjectivity sorts the set of posssibles into a
      dimension from 'best fit' to 'worst fit'. Objectivity is useful to aid in
      refining the subjectivity and so making the dimension better fit 'reality as

      The more choices in the set of probabilities means we exceed that 7+/-2
      limit. We are naturally attracted to the 'best fit' end of the dimension and
      so work from there 'down'. The point is that ALL of the dimension applies to
      a moment such that elements of the 'worst fit' can still contribute in a
      small way to the WHOLE experience and we can, do, often miss this (unless
      one is naturally anxious and so uses imagination to try and cover all
      possibilities - but this can lead to a failure to act!)

      http://members. iimetro.com. au/~lofting/ myweb/AbstractDo main.html

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 9 messages in this topic