Evolution, Science & Religion (Evolution)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Saturday, June 30, 2012, 19:03 (4527 days ago) @ romansh
edited by unknown, Saturday, June 30, 2012, 19:12

Buddhist training teaches you to become an observer of your own mind. It trains your volition.
> > 
> > Free will is a muscle in Buddhism, meditation is how you learn to exercise it. 
> This rings of dissonance again for me. No self versus free will however partial. My will is dependent on its environment ...
> 
...
It is, and it isn't. It's a classic Zen Koan. -The more you sit down and exercise your will--insanely--by doing absolutely nothing at all, you learn to watch all of these impulses. But as dependent your will is upon its environment, lets not forget that an observer by necessity is separate from its object. If you sit still and "observe" your thoughts and impulses as they arrive in your mind, if you prevent yourself from entering into the flow of thoughts as they waft by your eyes, you are making a stunning observation:-Something is separate from these thoughts, something that can choose to be enveloped by them, can just watch them go by. It's Dennett's version of free will: You don't choose what bubbles up from below, but something allows you to say yes or no. And that something can choose for example, to simply sit, do nothing, and observe. THAT is the conscious agent.-> > I'm using ego in a more technical sense. I think the ego in Buddhism more closely maps to Freud's "id." At any rate, as I said above, when I learned exactly how little of what I did was volitional, when I learned how much I was ruled by my passions, it was THAT that I found scary. I felt less in control of myself. I'm still not, but I'm getting better. 
> 
> I understand Matt, I find it's not just passions but everyday events that control me. I'm not saying there is no feedback to the environment, but any line I draw between my 'self' and its environment is purely arbitrary.
> -It is until you realize something like what I stated above: something exists that allows you to reflect on your mind and not be an active participant. What would you call this thing, if not free will? -As a side note, after about 15 minutes, something kind of miraculous happens->The mind under the surface usually stops bubbling things up to the "observer" function, or at least begins to quiet. (How much caffeine did I have that day?) -You can slow your mind down, through conscious will. What is that, if not free will?-> > Obviously I share your interest, but the only thing I can probably relate to you is that meditation feels like waking yourself up while in a dream within a dream. You become aware that you're dreaming, try to wake up, but perhaps barely realize that you're still not awake. There's techniques though to help mitigate this inevitability, and supposedly there was a man who accomplished it 2500 years ago...
> 
> This reminds me of the much maligned Blackmore and her first of the Ten Zen Questions, Am I conscious now? After much meditating on her part the conclusion she came to was the answer is No.
> 
> Even without any meditating, just simply interrogating my experience, I can see why she would say this.
> -Blakemore's quintessential flaw however is that the Buddhist idea of "observing the mind" *REQUIRES* one to be able to in some way, cognitively separate the observer from the experience. She's tied (by logic) to the thought that even the act of observation must be from the unconscious will, but this isn't so: -Even the act of engaging in meditation is an act of conscious volition. You're forcing yourself to "stop acting" and just observe. By realizing that there is a flow, and that you are caught up in it, you are realizing free will. This is extremely resonant with Dennett's idea of a "fettered" or "limited" free will. [It is also the exact idea of free will and its relationship with Zen.] -For an observer to exist in the first place, it is necessary to be able to remove yourself from the raging river of consciousness. THAT is free will, consciously exercised. Buddhism's underlying goal (though it traditionally denies goals) is to exercise our ability to be an observer. In Hindu tradition, this "observer" is the soul itself.-[EDITED]

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"