.
In respect of “Will,” does Sam Harris mean to explore something like choice-making (in respect of alternatives among degrees of freedom availed within parameters of possibilities) by an Immaterial, dualistic ghost that confines itself to the perimeter of a person’s BODY, as if the body were mere avatar for availing parameters for choice-making by Spirit? Does Harris mean to explore something like an Immeasurable quality, which yet has quantitatively measurable energy and POWER to move matter (such as a penny) up a wall?
*******
.
Conceptualize: How can there be simultaneity in the synchronization of Holistic Will, while still availing moral significance to feedback in the apprehensions of particular Perspectives of Will? How can Perspectives be causally meaningfully and not mere "ride alongs" and epiphenomena? If Reality is conceptualized as merely a continuous projection of a holograph, such would seem to implicate that our subjective perspectives are causally meaningless. This would be consistent with the observation that a non-measureable cannot be measured to push a penny up a wall. However, what if one conceptualizes a sequential flux of digital feedback between and among the sums of the parts versus the whole? What if there is an eternal flux in the eternal now, whereby the Holism and its Parts interfunction and apprehend one another, like an alternating current? As Perspectives, we apprehend and appreciate. As connecting synchronizer, the Holism responds to our apprehensions. Thus, unfolding purposefulness is guided via a dance of appreciative feedback. We, as Parts, would not be privy to each digital halting in the current of the back and forth. The current would appear to us to be continuous. A particular perspective neither notices nor measures the time or space between its incarnations.
.
NOTE: Coherence regarding such alternating current of feedback in appreciation may be better preserved or intuited by conceptualizing a trivalence, i.e.,: (1) a sum of particular perspectives (Son), (2) a connecting synchronizer of such parts (Father), and (3) the one of a kind whole-sum that constitutes both sides of such coin of conception (Holy Ghost).
In respect of “Will,” does Sam Harris mean to explore something like choice-making (in respect of alternatives among degrees of freedom availed within parameters of possibilities) by an Immaterial, dualistic ghost that confines itself to the perimeter of a person’s BODY, as if the body were mere avatar for availing parameters for choice-making by Spirit? Does Harris mean to explore something like an Immeasurable quality, which yet has quantitatively measurable energy and POWER to move matter (such as a penny) up a wall?
.
If so, I readily agree that no Immeasurable-To-Mortals has ever been Measured-By-Mortals. Merely to phrase the issue is to demonstrate the absurdity of trying to measure such a thing! However, I don’t agree that such a trivial and tautological twist disproves an intuition that an immeasurable quality of Will (or of meta-apprehension and appreciation) inter-functions (in ways beyond confinement to measurable bodies and braincases) in order to affect how particulars come to condense and manifest from a generally measurable field into particularly measurable relations. I don't agree that human feelings are simply simultaneous "ride-alongs," with no feedback-effect upon how events are guided or come to unfold.
.
I would agree that the ghost of Will is not quantitatively confine-able to a body or machine. Indeed, to believe otherwise would be to "believe" a direct contradiction in terms (which would constitute "belief" only in an oxymoronic sense). However, I do NOT agree that mere empiricism (of a kind that ignores Intuition while being founded on scientific Faith that all can be reduced to quantitative explanations) can "prove" that Qualitative Will does not abide. Mere empiricism cannot disprove an intuition of Qualitative Will, i.e., feedback of meta-apprehension and appreciation among perspectives that are synchronized with respect to a fluxing Holism.
.
By definition, the only way to test for a Non-Quantitative Qualitative (if Will abides in such a way) would be qualitative. Such a qualitative test would abide in the character of intuitional experience by a conscious Identity, as opposed to empirically measurable experience. To substitute a quantitative test for what can only be tested qualitatively is to try to twist word games for restating tautologies into proofs for that which such games cannot prove. It is hardly serious to suggest we should attempt quantitatively to measure the non-quantitative, and then to assert "proof" of the non-existence of the non-quantitative simply by restating the obvious: that the non-quantitative is not amenable to quantitative measure!
.
The non-quantitative (that is, the qualitative) is sensed in the general and subjective experience or intuition of an immaterial perspective of conscious Identity, not by quantitative measurement of an impingement on a materially definable sense organ. No doubt, Harris followers will next try to prove that "you," as an individual, neither exist nor matter.
.
************
.
When someone like Sam Harris says there is no such thing as Free Will, I need to have some idea of what he means by this “Will” — of which he says there is no such thing as. I need for him to define his terms, so that I do not gullibly allow myself to be led into a shell game of words, to recite a mere tautology under a different inflection, in order to confuse people into believing the mere inflection of a tautology actually demonstrates anything that is more than a trivial restatement of an assumption.
.
Skill with verbal shell games and tautological twists does not disprove intuition that an immeasurable quality of Will (or of meta-apprehension and appreciation) interfunctions in ways beyond measure and beyond confinement to measurable bodies and braincases. Simply put, circular reasoning does not resolve "the measurement problem," whereby that which comes to manifest is affected by that which observes or measures it. The purposes and perspectives of participants affect how particulars are appreciated and interpreted to manifest, appear, collapse, and condense from a generally measurable field into particularly measurable relations. (This collapse from the wave function into the particle function is often referred to as part of “the measurement problem.”)
.
Does Harris mean to explore something like choice-making (in respect of alternatives among degrees of freedom availed within parameters of possibilities) by an Immaterial, dualistic ghost that inhabits a person’s BODY, as if the body were a mere avatar for availing parameters for choice making by Spirit? If so, again, I agree that such an Immaterial spirit, by definition, has not been materially measured. And I agree that the ghost of Will is not quantitatively confine-able to a body or machine. Indeed, to believe otherwise would be to believe a direct contradiction in terms.
.
However, I do not agree that it is required that intuition of a Qualitative Will is false. I do not agree that the quantitatively measurable interactions of bodies could not be the significations and byproduce of inter-functionings of perspectives of Will. Rather, Qualitative Will can be conceptualized as expressing itself with feedback of meta-apprehension and appreciation among perspectives, synchronized to a fluxing Holism.
.
Does Harris mean that we should define and test Will as if it were something like an “undying energy that is confined to a particular human body?" If so, I simply see no need for such an absurd test. I do not sense how any serious philosopher of this day and age should postulate such a thing in order to need to have it quantitatively tested. After all, by definition, the test for a non-quantitative qualitative would need to be qualitative, i.e., of the character of intuitional experience by a conscious Identity, as opposed to empirically measurable experience.
.
BOTTOM LINE: If Harris has no pertinent and testable notion of Qualitative Will in mind, and if his notion takes Will as simply being not quantitatively testable, then there is little to be gained by playing word games with varying inflections for restating redundant tautologies. Such a method for testing whether Free Will is an illusion cannot be a serious one. Alternatively stated, it is, definitionally, non-serious to suggest we should attempt quantitatively to measure the non-quantitative, and then to assert, as "proof" of the non-existence of the non-quantitative, the triviality that the non-quantitative cannot be quantified. This is because the non-quantitative (that is, the qualitative) is sensed in the general experience or intuition of an immaterial perspective of conscious Identity --- not by quantitative measurement of an impingement on a materially definable sense organ. One who invariably disposes himself to take it as nonsense, to speak of that which cannot be appreciated except in the qualitative and not in the quantitative, can hardly have much relevance to helping to inspire broad contours for purpose, poetry, or prose. Nor to law, morality, or social guidance.
.*******
.
Conceptualize: How can there be simultaneity in the synchronization of Holistic Will, while still availing moral significance to feedback in the apprehensions of particular Perspectives of Will? How can Perspectives be causally meaningfully and not mere "ride alongs" and epiphenomena? If Reality is conceptualized as merely a continuous projection of a holograph, such would seem to implicate that our subjective perspectives are causally meaningless. This would be consistent with the observation that a non-measureable cannot be measured to push a penny up a wall. However, what if one conceptualizes a sequential flux of digital feedback between and among the sums of the parts versus the whole? What if there is an eternal flux in the eternal now, whereby the Holism and its Parts interfunction and apprehend one another, like an alternating current? As Perspectives, we apprehend and appreciate. As connecting synchronizer, the Holism responds to our apprehensions. Thus, unfolding purposefulness is guided via a dance of appreciative feedback. We, as Parts, would not be privy to each digital halting in the current of the back and forth. The current would appear to us to be continuous. A particular perspective neither notices nor measures the time or space between its incarnations.
.
NOTE: Coherence regarding such alternating current of feedback in appreciation may be better preserved or intuited by conceptualizing a trivalence, i.e.,: (1) a sum of particular perspectives (Son), (2) a connecting synchronizer of such parts (Father), and (3) the one of a kind whole-sum that constitutes both sides of such coin of conception (Holy Ghost).
.
3 comments:
It seems Progressives consider one world government as not only inevitable, but also fundamentally good --- almost regardless of whatever might be the lowest common denominator that will come with it. Freedom, dignity, merit, and individual responsibility are considered far less important than putting us all safely and equally in the same boat. For those of this worldview, there is no God (except to advance one world politics), no effective Will, and no purpose (except one world "progress"). Rather, we are simply accidental glands being projected through space-time by the remnant of an original Elvis force, which has now "left the building." In respect of the departed Elvis force, there is no purpose to our stomachs and hormones, except (for some reason that remains inexplicable even to Leftists) to seek equal numbness in depravity, dope, and death). Oddly, Leftists tend to believe cultures evolve in respect of group determinism, while believing that any notion of group based biological evolution is impious, if not quite heresy. No one can be considered by the Left to be smart or hip without prominently reciting or displaying the stigmata (and Che-mata) of the one worlders. However, I don't believe the world has come to this point for humane and idealistic reasons. I don't believe the modern Caesers who fund and finger this movement much care about the desires, needs, and self-actualization of the masses. Rather, the Caesers dupe easily doped gullibles and then milk them. What equality really means is the destruction of a self-guided middle class and the return of the masses and herd-minds to plantations and fiefdoms. And the people said umm umm umm.
Well, if Reality were conceptualized as merely a continuous projection of a holograph, such would implicate that our subjective perspectives are causally meaningless. This would be consistent with common sense that a non-measureable cannot be measured to push a penny up a wall. However, what if one conceptualizes a sequential flux of digital feedback between and among the sums of the parts versus the whole? What if there abides an eternal flux in the eternal now, whereby the Holism and its Parts interfunction and apprehend one another, like an alternating current? As Perspectives, we apprehend and appreciate. As synchronizer, the connecting Holism responds to our apprehensions. Thus, unfolding purposefulness is guided via a dance of appreciative feedback. We, as Parts, would not be privy to, or able to measure, each digital halting in the current of the back and forth. Rather, the meta current, even though digitally alternating, would appear to us to be continuous. A particular perspective would neither notice nor measure the time or space between incarnations.
Obama will do all he can do to sink us so far that he will never have to admit to allow another to lead us to do better. And he's far, far from being the only one. Indeed, he is only the smiley face that was selected to front a monster that is much larger than he is. It is a monster that will admit of no challenging middle class. Plenty of "Progressive" populists and tyrants want most of all to rule through the easy means of duping the multitudinous ignorant with the help of the allied corrupt. Indeed, they now run nearly all institutions of significance and are working furiously to bring the remnant (the Second Amendment and the Internet) under control. They sense this is their time and they are all in. They will collapse everything before they will allow their sheeple to learn the truth.
Post a Comment