Being told that essentially one has no choice in matters previously assumed open to him for all choosing, all exercise of what is often called free will is often not an easily acceptable thing. This is particularly true in matters of what would be considered the moral sphere. Even our apparent choosing to separate such matters into such spheres (particularly of moral ascription) is often too easily made apparent to us.
Listen if you can.
If one is purely materialistic, whether he assigns some or all origins to a “big bang” description/conception or the like, all that is (surely including each man and all men) is a totally dependent consequence to every operation of “law(s)” that govern such matter. The sun, for instance, has and has had no choice (so to speak) but to emanate what we call light and heat. And one can easily (and no less) assume this also pertains to man if, and as, a purely materialistic being. One might even conclude one of the many laws that govern consciousness (if in all consequence to materiality) is that each exercise in and of such consciousness is given to (under the law of) thinking of itself as free. In that sense man has no choice…but to think of himself (in his consciousness) as free. In fact (or truth) it may well be one of the signal governance’s of the consciousness of man of being completely locked up in, and to, thinking himself free.
If you do the experiment and push against this you may see something. But you would also be caught yourself in that “if”…for you could not, and would not “do the experiment” unless you too are likewise caught in a complete constraining. The “if” causes you to think in terms of choice and freedom to choose…(I have options!) but all it describes is possibility and can neither impart nor conclude to any freedom.
Besides which (you might as well admit it) you are loathe to consider that my introduction of “if” is what grants and/or establishes any freedom to yourself.
And let’s face it (as another law of man’s consciousness in all consequence) you are not prepared to hear from “just another consciousness” of a man about the freedom you already presume you have. You are entirely and only beholden to your own consciousness (or the very one you are witness to) for this…and to yourself believe you need no other to either inform, confirm, instruct, contradict, or bring into question, such a matter.
You simply cannot bear it.
Neither can I.
Is there a legitimate question here? Could there be?
What consciousness could bear all contradiction against itself?
And if, and by doing so…would it not then be shown…the stronger?
The greater?
By being able to bear (withstand) what the consciousness of man cannot.
And listen again of you can.
If you say it is slight of hand to introduce that another consciousness “can be” (might be, could be) plainly see what you are saying. That in a world of some 7 billion possibilities of consciousness, yours is the only true one.
Admit then you are truly unable to accept another as being “as real as you”.
Unless you are able to admit…you are simply, and in all, absolutely no different than any other man, at all.
Are you…able?
But don’t despair at finding you think yourself god, even if you say “there is none”.
There’s a help for that manifest opposition of yourself…against yourself.
All of a man’s ways are right in his own eyes.
And that is of itself, all that is wrong with, and about man.
And he cannot help himself with it.
He is not free to.
israelx7wordpresscom 