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

Re: questioning

Expand Messages
  • louise
    Tom, I have been battling to clarify questions involving necessity, but do not identify this with the concept of determinism. For me there is still a tension,
    Message 1 of 22 , Dec 23, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Tom,

      I have been battling to clarify questions involving necessity, but do not identify this with the concept of determinism. For me there is still a tension, or a chasm, between philosophical and scientific territory.

      Louise

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
      >
      > Herman, Louise, Mary and all.
      >
      > I think sometimes freedom versus determinism can become like the medieval habit of debating the number of angels that could fit on the head of a pin. If we take the position that no concepts totally describe and encompas reality; at most any theory is a temporary paradigm to describe various processes, until the time new data emerges that don't fit within the paradigm, and a new paradigm becomes dominant until such time that new data contradict some parts of the new paradigm. And considering, that according to most psychianalytic views, most of the mental processes going on within is are unconcious, both various impuslses and the judgements we subconciously make about them. As for as the experience of passive versus active experience, imagination can be a surrender to fantasy but actions that require determination and the overcoming of pain, fear etc promote an experience of agency.
      >
      > Peace,
      > Tom
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Herman
      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 6:07 PM
      > Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: questioning
      >
      >
      >
      > Hi Mary,
      >
      > 2009/12/22 Mary <josephson45r@...>
      >
      > > Polly,
      > >
      > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Herman <hhofmeister@> wrote:
      > >
      > > <I guess it is a matter of perspective. We both agree that decisions are
      > > made. There is without doubt the experience of imagining multiple possible
      > > courses of action, one by one (during which time we are oblivious to what
      > > is
      > > happening in the sensed world), and imagining possible consequences of any
      > > act that might be made, with one course of action eventually being
      > > followed.>
      > >
      > > But who is imagining? Whose perspective?
      > >
      >
      > It would come down to whether you are asking about identity or agency. If I
      > say that I am imagining, I am only saying that the imagination is associated
      > with this body, and not that body or tree or house over there. I agree with
      > what you say below about self / not-self. The not-self in that context is
      > the other, and that relates to identity.
      >
      > But if I were to say that I am imagining, and by that mean that I (whatever
      > is identified as being self) am causing the imagination to happen, then I am
      > talking about agency, and I would have to sharply disagree with myself :-)
      >
      > >
      > > <My observation of that sequence of events is that it happens regardless of
      > > whether there is a sense of active participation in and identification with
      > > it, or merely being present to it, as a passive, non-positional observation
      > > of a series of events that has neither a definite beginning or end. And so,
      > > because the experience of decision-making occurs both with or without a
      > > sense of a privileged, autonomous self pulling the strings, I feel quite
      > > safe in saying that the sense of the privileged self does not actually play
      > > a causal role in decision making at all. At best, it may be there as a prop
      > > to fill an explanatory gap, as the gods were before Nietzsche signed their
      > > death certificates :-)>
      > >
      > > Your experience is different than mine. The only explanatory gap for me is
      > > uncertainty. My decisions will affect me and others often in unpredictable
      > > ways. Therein lies the terror. Therein lies the freedom.
      > >
      > > Perhaps I'm confusing a discrete body with a discrete mind. You see, I
      > > don't consider the concept of a 'self' any less abstract or more useful than
      > > the concept of 'no self.' Interaction with or dependence on others doesn't
      > > negate the self, in my opinion. Concepts, even at the deepest level, should
      > > accommodate our differing perspectives. I find the existentialist self-other
      > > yoke closer to my experience. That's okay, right :)
      > >
      > >
      > You betcha :-)
      >
      > Polly
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Herman
      Hi Louise, 2009/12/24 louise ... Just to clarify why I wrote what I wrote. Your usage uncorrupted suggested being free from/of
      Message 2 of 22 , Dec 30, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Louise,

        2009/12/24 louise <hecubatoher@...>

        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Herman <hhofmeister@...> wrote:
        >
        > [Louise] Freedom does not require the subject to be self-regarding in the
        > way you imply, by using the phrase, "made to happen". If the subject
        > succeeds in not interfering with the natural process of which one is part,
        > whether consciously or not, it is at its most free. This typically requires
        > the spontaneity of an uncorrupted nature, or else sustained resolve.
        >
        > [Polly] Ahh, I see. You use freedom in the sense of "freedom from....."
        >
        > No, "freedom from" is not what I mean. At least I am discovering in what
        > ways my statements are misunderstood.
        >

        Just to clarify why I wrote what I wrote. Your usage "uncorrupted" suggested
        being free from/of corruption to me.

        Very happy to be wrong in that reading, of course ......


        Polly


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • louise
        ... Yes, if one is corrupted, to become freed of corruption is a good thing. I was writing, however, about freedom for , whether this occurs in the happiest
        Message 3 of 22 , Dec 30, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Herman <hhofmeister@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hi Louise,
          >
          > 2009/12/24 louise <hecubatoher@...>
          >
          > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Herman <hhofmeister@> wrote:
          > >
          > > [Louise] Freedom does not require the subject to be self-regarding in the
          > > way you imply, by using the phrase, "made to happen". If the subject
          > > succeeds in not interfering with the natural process of which one is part,
          > > whether consciously or not, it is at its most free. This typically requires
          > > the spontaneity of an uncorrupted nature, or else sustained resolve.
          > >
          > > [Polly] Ahh, I see. You use freedom in the sense of "freedom from....."
          > >
          > > No, "freedom from" is not what I mean. At least I am discovering in what
          > > ways my statements are misunderstood.
          > >
          >
          > Just to clarify why I wrote what I wrote. Your usage "uncorrupted" suggested
          > being free from/of corruption to me.
          >

          Yes, if one is corrupted, to become freed of corruption is a good thing. I was writing, however, about "freedom for", whether this occurs in the happiest form, or in the toughness of resolve required when opposition internal or external creates a battle. I realise now that battle is too close to me for reliable comment. The whole point of attempting philosophic communication may be over now, for me. L.


          > Very happy to be wrong in that reading, of course ......
          >
          >
          > Polly
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.