--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "mainstream20016" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "mainstream20016" > > <mainstream20016@> wrote: > > > > > Curtis, this is addressed to you and I'm sure you will respond, > > but.....may I ? > > > Trinity3, why would you doubt that he doesn't feel independent of > > unconscious processes, > > > and that he uses them (uncoscious processes) for his art ? It seems > > that Curtis is fully one > > > with the creative expressions from their inception, through their > > expression through his > > > art, in his case blues music performance. The concept of control of > > the process was > > > introduced by your question, and isn't what he asserts. He seems > > to be a fully > > > enlightened artist, at one with the first creative impulse, through > > its relative expression of > > > his own voice, guitar, and physical expression. Expanding the range > > of awareness of the > > > conscious mind to percieve the first impulses of creativity is what > > FFLers have been doing > > > naturally for a very long time. > > > -Mainstream > > > > Mainstream, maybe I am doing injustice to Curtis, I am certainly not > > doubting his creative process. Its simply my understanding of atheism > > as a philosophy of life. Religion, any religion certainly questions > > the independence of our mind /ego (while I am aware that Christianity > > makes it a special point that God gave man freedom of decision - not > > my belief) and makes it dependent on another entity, atheism asserts > > us that we alone are in control of our lives. At least thats what I > > have understood it to mean until now. Of course, everyone is aware of > > 'limitations' we all have,imposed to us by nature. But there is a > > fundamental belief that we are ourself in charge of what we believe > > in, that we with our mind can logically understand life and should > > reject irrationality. In fact religion is seen as 'irrational' by > > atheists, which implies that they believe in a rational understanding > > of life. IOW they regard ratio higher than feelings or experiences (as > > Curtis is never tired to point out that he regards the same mystical > > experiences many of us share in a different way and strips them of > > any religious meaning they could have.) In fact he tries to understand > > them rationally only, as I believe. Thus he places ratio highest, and > > I always understood this to mean a place where intellect is 'in control' > > > > t3rinity, you have a polar opposite view from atheism regarding the authorship of any > person's thoughts. While atheism denies the existence of God, you attribute all thoughts > to God - Even the thoughts of atheists' that deny God's existence!!
Yes. > Why do you believe that humans do not have free will ? The question I would have is: Who has the free will? Very much, what we consider ourselves to be, is just a bundle of desires impressions, reactions etc. This is how most people define themselves. They say: this is who I am. And why? Because I wanted it that way. Research shows that most of what we want and think are rationalizations, and that decisions are formed in the brain a split second before we become aware of it! What we do, and what we say why we do something are two separate issues! If you call that entity, who decides for you, life or God, or if it is simply the result of eternally cycling material processes is not my point here. My point is the illussiory character of our selves. I put the decision making into 'Gods' hand as this is a convenient term most people can relate to. I don't mean to prove the existence of a God by denying free-will. Rather I point out that an atheist has unproven belief systems, he is hardly aware of: His belief in a separate ego and his own decision-making. An atheist in short believes in himself being in charge through his ratio. > Is the concept of free will too > removed from the belief that God authors all ? What if God authored free will ? How would > that concept fit for you ? Its Christianity. Doesn't fit for me. Why do you decide the way you decide? Why do you think the way you think, and why do others think differently than you? Then if you decide the wrong way, you have to go to eternal hell, that's the conclusion of religious free will. According to Christianities free will Curtis is doomed because he is an atheist. According to my theory of determination its simlpy a phase in his evolutionary development, and there is no guilt only different levels of understanding, and different mental and spiritual capacities. Chose what you like ;-)Everyone obviously thinks his way of thinking to be the best. But thoughts are just things that flow in the atmosphere, and we pick them up according to a feeling of resonance. That simply is there. You are not doing it, it simply happens. So there is no guilt or sin, there is just an evolutionary development. Understanding happens, its not something you can do.
