jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (74 posts)

Free will or not free will that is the question?????

  1. Knight6 profile image68
    Knight6posted 8 days ago

    I recently read one of the post here from a woman who ask for help in trying to understand why god let people who abuse kids have kids and those who wanted kids not have them. As i read her piece and read through the comments from other users the term free will kept on coming up. So i ask the community this........
    Do we the human race deserve free will? We have not done anything to show we compassionate towards one another.God gave us the freedom to chose, was that the wrong thing for him to do? could we compare it to giving a child a loaded gun without the safety on?
    Even if you remove the god factor, i think what i am trying to say or ask is Are we to childish to be left to our devices and if so what are the solutions  if any??????

    1. Knight6 profile image68
      Knight6posted 7 days ago in reply to this

      Thank you all for your insight and hopefully continued insight. I think the questions i asked may have been put a little to simply and the debate about free will and whether or not we have it is a lot more complex then just faith biology or social and mental situation. The two things we have no free will over are being born and dying neither of which we have control over and my view is that is the point. We live our lives in what we believe is free will but for humans need to be treated like children allow them a child to learn and grow from experience but keep some control over them to prevent them from doing harm to themselves,we function as humans because of free will and no free will the conscious and unconscious mind one doing whatever it wants the other reigning in control that is why we don't all kill our boss we just talk about it. This could be called self control or maybe it is control over our free will. Now please don't point out the fact that people can take their own lives thus freewill, i decide i want to die so i die. I understand that seems like free will but speaking as some one who thought about it and nearly did believe me free will was no where near it. The free will to want to die was the illusion it was false control, taking the child analogy it was a tantrum which almost cost me my life but control from unconscious parts of my mind stop it. There are people out there who have this in reverse but i believe it is still the same idea. I might be wrong but who knows...........

      1. Stephanie Billon profile image64
        Stephanie Billonposted 5 days ago in reply to this

        This is my belief that I have formed from the knowledge I have gained throughput my years...
        God gave us free will because he wanted us to love him and choose him by choice, not because we are forced to.  It would be great for him if he wanted us not to have free will because we all would love him unconditionally and everything would run smoothly according o God's will. When you think about this, honestly, would you seriously choose to magically cast a spell on the man you fell in love with or would you want him to love you by his own choice? God does not want our love and respect to be forced; this is why he gave us free will

        1. BuddiNsense profile image61
          BuddiNsenseposted 5 days ago in reply to this

          We don't have free will, what we have is an illusion of free will.
          Just see how many gods are there (as per different people born in different parts of the world), as they have different information. If there were any free will there would only be a choice between yes or no.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
            Kathryn L Hillposted 4 days ago in reply to this

            BuddiN sense this reply does not make any …

            "We don't have free will, what we have is an illusion of free will."  How so?


            "Just see how many gods are there (as per different people born in different parts of the world), as they have different information." Huh?

            Do you have an example of these differing gods and religious philosophies? If you look closely most religions, no matter where they are in the world, say the same things. What do these religious philosophies have to do with free will? They all agree on the precept of doing unto others as you would have others do unto you.

            While we have free will, everyone would agree, we must wisely guide our free will to avoid hurting others and steer clear of bad consequences for ourselves.

            For example, many foreigners come to America assuming America is literally the land of the FREE!  WHEE…! Young men buy new cars on credit, drive them too fast, get tons of speeding tickets they can't pay and rack up credit card and student loan bills. Older women from other countries, once they become citizens, finally get free/divorced from the SOB they felt stuck with in their own country and, although they were happy to get divorced, now they must work themselves to the bone with no family support, whoops. Even some young adults, who grew up in this country, get married with no job, make babies and are stuck in the negative until they are bankrupt. I have seen all these scenarios first hand. Were these people using their free wills? Yes. Were they guiding them appropriately? No. Who's fault is it when they get into so much debt, they don't know what to do? God's?





            "If there were any free will there would only be a choice between yes or no." Yes or no to what?

    2. promisem profile image95
      promisemposted 5 days ago in reply to this

      I don't understand why people still define God as someone or something who unleases mass murders, gang rapes and other horrific human behaviors.

      There is no such God. If there is, then such a God is not worth devotion.

      1. Knight6 profile image68
        Knight6posted 5 days ago in reply to this

        Remove God from the human race, any God or belief, and the truth is the only thing left to blame for all the horrors in the world is humans, who use a belief system to pass the blame. religion is an insurance policy for when we die. The real problem with the world is us.

      2. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
        Kathryn L Hillposted 5 days ago in reply to this

        God as an essence is worth devotion if you wish to free yourself from appearances.

  2. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 8 days ago

    Deep analysis might show that our so called free will is limited to deciding to do the right thing or not.
    Many other human actions are governed by instincts and social pressures or such things as hormonal imbalances, psychological quirks etc.
    Really we are usually at the mercy of biological and social forces beyond our control.
    We are not in control of the most basic things such as breathing and heart rate.
    There is an illusion of free will except paradoxically for the ever present free will to choose "right or wrong". That is also another huge debate as well. However the "battle between right and wrong" or between "good and evil" is paramount to what makes a human an actual human as opposed to an inhumane creature.
    This drama is inbuilt in the entire evolution of man's culture, sentience, art, and really in every aspect of real humanity.
    It is itself powerful self evident proof of a higher spiritual calling for humanity. It suggests tests and future rewards.
    The very poor state of people's world at this point in history may be irrelevant to the central drama being played out. In other words for an individual to adhere to "right" in such a sewer is itself a passing of the test.
    What is right: compassion, selflessness, empathy or what is reduced symbolically to the one hippy word Love.

  3. ptosis profile image77
    ptosisposted 8 days ago

    In order to have 'Free Will' then have to believe in an soul.
    If a soul does exist, where does it exist?
    It used to be thought the soul was in the heart, now most people think it resides in the brain.

    Which brain? The big one or the little one?

    There are about 100 million neurons in your gut - the same size as a cat's brain that controls you appetite. This brain cannot speak but perhaps it influences decisions other than eating that we may not aware of. Sociopathic serial killers know how to tap into this and marketers try to by selling an idea and not a product. Think of those commercials where you have no idea what they are trying to sell." - http://hub.me/adTsn

    "In the book “Who's in Charge?”, author Michael Gazzaniga says that our brain's parallel processing is like a committee, there is no head honcho. Unlike in the movie “The Matrix”, there is no Architect - only the Interpreter. Our brains are a convention of contending delegates from which our self identity emerges greater that the sum of individual parts. - https://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/ChaosFreeWill

    First thing have to do is un-program ourselves of Descartes  dualism which created the the Mind-Body Problem. The mind–body problem is the question of how the human mind and body can causally interact. Descartes' philosophy requires a gateway between the free will and the determined body. So he picks the Pineal Gland.

    So first step is forget dualism  which is going to be hard since it has been drummed into us since childhood. Don't go for the "no free will" neither - that would be very depressing. Determinism is SO depressing.

    Self-determination theory, for example, holds that volitional functioning—intentional, freely chosen behavior—is a basic human need (Deci & Ryan, 1985).

    https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13696056.jpg

    ["German scientists Hans Helmut Kornhuber and Lüder Deecke discovered a phenomenon they dubbed "bereitschaftspotential" (BP) — a term that translates to "readiness potential." Their discovery, that the brain enters into a special state immediately prior to conscious awareness, set off an entirely new subfield.

    Libet concluded that we have no free will as far as the initiation of our movements are concerned, but that we had a kind of cognitive "veto" to prevent the movement at the last moment; we can't start it, but we can stop it."
    - http://io9.gizmodo.com/5975778/scientif … -free-will

  4. cheaptrick profile image75
    cheaptrickposted 8 days ago

    "We cant start it,but we can stop it"...I like that;I'm going to be thinking about that for some time,thanks.
    Free will is a logical absurdity...Given the definitions and parameters touted by religionists these days,some violation of those would have to occur for free will to exist...The limited amount of scientific investigation available seems to side with the post above.(again,thanks).
    The problem with determinism is...if it's true...how can we execute a serial killer...or imprison a pedophile...or anyone else for that matter?Determinism,in essence,is a 'get out of jail free' card...even if it's true...

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 8 days ago in reply to this

      The answer lies in determinism itself.  We can do such things because we have no choice in the matter: fear, self interest, disgust, etc. require that we execute such people.  We don't have a choice, any more than the serial killer did.

      Not something I would agree with, and rather sad to think that nature evolved us to such a state, but there it is.

      1. ptosis profile image77
        ptosisposted 8 days ago in reply to this

        Good answer W

      2. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
        Kathryn L Hillposted 7 days ago in reply to this

        Crummy answer, w.

      3. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
        Kathryn L Hillposted 7 days ago in reply to this

        According to online dictonary, determinism is: "the doctrine that human action, is ultimately determined by causes external to the will.

        Some philosophers have taken determinism to imply that individual human beings have no free will

        and (therefore) cannot be held morally responsible for their actions."


        That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

        "In the book “Who's in Charge?”, author Michael Gazzaniga says that our brain's parallel processing is like a committee, there is no head honcho."

        Oh, Brother! roll

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 7 days ago in reply to this

          So?  Read your first sentence again: human action is determined by causes external to will.  Thus free will does not exist because factors outside that will are what determines actions.

          Still don't agree with it, but that's what determinism is all about.  No free will, as defined in your first sentence.

          1. ptosis profile image77
            ptosisposted 7 days ago in reply to this

            Actually w is right IF you adhere to 19th century philos and you will get depessed or angry.  Read the newer stuff. Learned more about brain in last 10 years than last 10k.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 7 days ago in reply to this

              Actually, I'm seeing more on the side of determinism than free will; we are constructed in such a way as to make nearly every choice outside of will.  Choices are made based on desire, yes, but even more so on past experiences coupled with current sensory and neural input (those M neurons in the gut, for instance.

              All while physics says random events happen (free will!) and that everything is interconnected and dependent on each other (determinism).  So when push comes to shove I come down on the side of free will because determinism is so damnably depressing, just as you say.

          2. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
            Kathryn L Hillposted 7 days ago in reply to this

            No. The inner consciousness of a person determines how he or she will react to external stimuli.
            ( stimuli: "stimulant, encouragement, impetus, boost, prompt, prod, incentive, inducement, inspiration; motivation, impulse" ).

            Internal reactions to the outer world have been pre-programmed into the psyche, mostly during the first six years of life, but an adult decides whether or not to act according to unconscious, subconscious or conscious reactions to outer stimuli. For instance, my friend is serving chocolate ice cream at her child's birthday party. My immediate reaction is to want some because I enjoyed it as a child. Nevertheless, as an adult, I know its not healthy for me, so I don't have any. In this case, I consciously guided my free will based on my knowledge that the high sugar and fat content of ice cream is not good for me. Those who do end up eating ice cream at this birthday party probably did not:
            1. know ice cream is detrimental to their health.
            2. care about their health.
            3. have a reason to exercise "won't power."

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 7 days ago in reply to this

              But this only works if you stop before reaching the end of the exercise.

              You don't take ice cream because past history tells you it is unhealthy.  You have a fixation on your health - the neurons of your brain are built and connected that way.  And between the two, you have no choice but to turn down the ice cream; your internal fixation won't allow you to do things known detrimental to your health.  Other people without that fixation may have ice cream, but you don't have a choice.

            2. BuddiNsense profile image61
              BuddiNsenseposted 6 days ago in reply to this

              And the inner consciousness is entirely determined by the genes and environment.
              Or, only Genes, in the sense you meant, the influences once you discount the environment.

        2. ptosis profile image77
          ptosisposted 7 days ago in reply to this

          You were compelled to reply with a post.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
            Kathryn L Hillposted 7 days ago in reply to this

            Lol. I decided to reply.

            decide:
            "resolve, determine, make up one's mind, make a decision; elect, choose, opt, plan, aim, have the intention, have in mind."


            choose verb
            "1 select, pick (out), opt for, settle on, decide on, fix on, take; appoint, name, nominate, vote for, elect.
            2 wish, want, desire, feel/be inclined, please, like, see fit."

        3. BuddiNsense profile image61
          BuddiNsenseposted 6 days ago in reply to this

          Morality is determined by the community. It's a set of rules its members should follow. People are NOT responsible for their actions because, yes, it is determined by factors not on their control. But in practice society can work only by holding people responsible for their actions because, the rules and its implementation are also part of the externalities that constrains.
          You probably have heard of the McNaughten's rule. People are not responsible for their actions if insane. But what degree of insanity is insane? It is a continuum. At some point we have to draw the line. Yes, it's arbitrary, but that is what makes the society functions and allow it to change and adapt.

      4. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 7 days ago in reply to this

        Wilderness
        The Reverend Donald wants to send innocent child refugees back into war zones where they will be raped and killed etc.
        Thoughts?

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
          Kathryn L Hillposted 7 days ago in reply to this

          home is a war zone? Maybe these people who got a good education can go back and try to change things for the better. They can also choose to become citizens and come back.

        2. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 7 days ago in reply to this

          You need to take them into the refuge you have constructed on your personal island.  You must protect everyone from the evil Reverend.  Hope your fortune is large.

          And your mind has become so twisted with hatred for the President of the United States you cannot stray from thinking of him for more than a few minutes.  It's called "determinism"; your neural construction bars you from living a life of cheer and kindness, but will remain locked into hatred for at least 4 years.

          1. ptosis profile image77
            ptosisposted 6 days ago in reply to this

            I am highly determined to return to Hubpages to hate on 'Ol Bone Spurs like a freaking drug addict.  What should I do?  Oh I know ... Just 'stop it'

            If you hate Bob Newhart then don't click on https://youtu.be/Ow0lr63y4Mw

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 6 days ago in reply to this

              I'm sure you are, and I'm sure it is cathartic to you - releasing hatred in a long, if senseless, diatribe usually is.

              It just doesn't do much for readers; I fear your propensity for using opinion as fact coupled with massive exaggeration and even outright lies has rather ruined any credibility you might have had.

          2. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 6 days ago in reply to this

            Wilderness
            Please refrain from personal attacks. Otherwise...........you know.

          3. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 6 days ago in reply to this

            I note you haven't responded to my observations about the glaring hypocritical dichotomy between "hubbers" who criticise fundamentalist views while in the same  breath supporting a fundamentalist political leader. 
            See, we can't have our cake and eat it too.
            If someone insists all believers in God are ready to kill and they also follow a fundamentalist who tries to send refugee children to their deaths: ergo they are supporting the same thing they allegedly criticized with Alzheimer reasoning.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 6 days ago in reply to this

              Probably because there is nothing to reply to.  Your quaint tirades against the President, whether meant that way or not, show nothing but irrational hatred and lies.

              The empty claim of sending children to die is a case in point - the President hasn't sent refugee children anywhere, let alone to their death.  Or the claim that the President is a fundamentalist Christian - he isn't and no one putting any effort into truth and reality would not make such a claim. 

              But you're certainly correct in that we can't have cake and eat it too.  When one simply spouts nonsense day after day, without any effort towards truth (think of calling Trump a "reverend" here smile ), well, no one is much interested in replying.  Come back to reality, get off the soap box and I'll listen.  If you just want replies to lies, insinuations of evil and other ridiculous claims you'll have to go elsewhere.

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                So its only you who thinks poor Donald doesn't support fundamentalists and even Nazis.
                Your arguments cake is that you vigourously defend atheism but you eat supporting religious fundamentalists great white hope the Reverend Donald.
                I note your argument unsuccessfully tries desperately to separate the two opposing views.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                  I don't see any information as to where children were sent from or where they were sent to, to die.  Have you given up on that wild, silly claim and turned to some other irrelevant and false allegation now?

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 3 days ago in reply to this

                    The claim is that you both defend and despise religious fundamentalism.
                    Donald is one of those fundamentalists. He's been desperately trying to ban refugees since his Russian backed campaign. It's been relentless.
                    I'm glad you are trying to act as if this hasn't been happening so all the readers can witness the bizarre double standards and fruitless denials.
                    These bizarre denials would actually be funny except for the dangerous plight of refugees and their innocent children..

    2. BuddiNsense profile image61
      BuddiNsenseposted 6 days ago in reply to this

      We can execute a serial killer because he is a serial killer... it's determined by his biology(genes and environment). So by executing, we are not reforming him or punishing him but helping people who otherwise might be killed by him, the same way we used to kill the 'man eater' big cats [of course we may keep him in confinement hoping that at some point he might change, but we need the wherewithal]. Then, there is the condition of negative stimulus, the environmental factor. The execution might act as a negative stimulus, a deterrent, for some.

  5. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
    Kathryn L Hillposted 7 days ago

    Individual Consciousness is in charge. Humans have the most consciousness and self-awareness. Of course, at every single given second they decide, based on numerous factors, what course of action to take. The problem is, most people do not know how to guide themselves toward their own true happiness. They don't have enough information to go by. Like a sailor adrift in the ocean with no compass. The sailor can wait until night-time to see the stars, but even then, knowledge of the stars needs to have been learned somewhere along the line.

  6. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
    Kathryn L Hillposted 7 days ago

    Even if you remove the god factor, i think what i am trying to say or ask is Are we to childish to be left to our devices and if so what are the solutions  if any??????

    Even if you remove the God factor, I think what you are trying to ask, are these questions:

    1. Are we too childish to be left to our own devices?

    2. If so what are the solutions ...  if any??????


    1. Children are in a state of open-ness to the ways of the world they were born into. If a child is not taught The Golden Rule and is not given the freedom to know himself, he will be like a colt running with no sense of direction: Without his mother he could go running of a cliff. Without his sense of how to keep himself safe, he will plunge to his death.

    Children have the potential to learn how to be safe in the world and how to be concerned for the welfare of others. If we are like children and our creator is God, doesn't it make sense that we must find God and learn how to guide our free wills, which of course, yes we have. Otherwise what is the purpose of our existence?

    2. The solution is to teach ourselves and our children well. What is "well"?
    Hint: Find God or the source of goodness, joy, happiness within ourselves.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 7 days ago in reply to this

      "Otherwise what is the purpose of our existence? "

      There IS no "purpose" to our existence, not in the sense you mean it.  While one might say that nature has decreed that our "purpose" is to survive as long as possible as a species, and others might say we all define our own "purpose" in life, neither is what you mean.

      1. cheaptrick profile image75
        cheaptrickposted 7 days ago in reply to this

        I beg to differ W...The design determines the function and the function determines purpose.The purpose of wire is to conduct electricity though it can be used for other things;It's primary purpose is to conduct electricity.I submit that the design of human beings is to function as conductors of consciousness which,hopefully,increases awareness;Why?...I'm afraid at that point it all goes over my head and into deeper water (please see avatar lol)...but I'm fairly certain that we are designed primarily to conduct consciousness and have the capacity to increase or grow that consciousness by various means to yield greater awareness...again,that's where it goes beyond me...A.D.R

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 7 days ago in reply to this

          And I submit that the design of humans is to maximize the tenure of the species on the planet.  But, just like Kathryn, your use of the term "design" does not equate with mine, for the dumb forces of nature and evolution cannot truly be said to "design" anything at all.  Not the Grand Canyon, not Angel Falls and not the human body.  It's just the closest thing we have to a designer.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
            Kathryn L Hillposted 7 days ago in reply to this

            Have you never designed anything? If we do not have free will, we would not design, invent and make things.
            I have designed many a thing. Maybe you don't have free will, but I do!

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 7 days ago in reply to this

              I have - a part of my past jobs was design and construction.

              Now all you have to do is show the link between lack of free will and not being able to design anything.  Do birds have free will?  Ants and termites?  Salmon?  beavers?  All are known for design work, yet it's more than a little difficult for me to assign "free will" to ants or even salmon.

              1. ptosis profile image77
                ptosisposted 6 days ago in reply to this

                You forgot spiders.

                My favorite spider education movie about spider webs is located at
                https://youtu.be/Dg-r-S0fIkA



                Please put your drink down before laughing all over your keyboard. (seriously)

  7. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
    Kathryn L Hillposted 6 days ago

    Consciousness is pure at birth. It is diluted after that, but still pure throughout life. Its a matter of perceiving it. Our actions are always according to how we choose to guide them according to the free will of pure to diluted consciousness.

    1. BuddiNsense profile image61
      BuddiNsenseposted 6 days ago in reply to this

      What do you mean by consciousness in the first place?
      What is this purity? That purity or whatever is decided by the genes that the fetus inherited along with the maternal uterine environment.

      1. ptosis profile image77
        ptosisposted 6 days ago in reply to this

        I think she is being abstract and not based on any empirical evidence. Not saying she is wrong but her statement has nothing to do with fetus or the genes.

        But what is consciousness in the first place is a very excellent question!

        I personally believe if you are going by the "I think, therefore I am", is wrong because it's based on the believe of an immortal soul that is not physical and doesn't have any way of interacting with the physical.

        But that's a lot harder for most people so here is an animation on "I think, therefore I am."

        https://www.brainpickings.org/2015/04/1 … es-ted-ed/




        https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13699324_f1024.jpg

      2. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
        Kathryn L Hillposted 6 days ago in reply to this

        Consciousness is awareness. We are not aware when we are asleep. The apparatus for conscious awareness is shut down in a resting phase. When we are awake we are aware. When we are awake and aware we choose what we do, think and say throughout the entire active phase. What we choose to think, say and do is based on freedom of individual thought. Everything we direct ourselves to do is not based on genetics, influenced, yes, but not propelled exclusively by genetics. At any point one can choose to say, act, do and even feel contrary to natural inbuilt or absorbed impulses. 

        For instance, just because a handsome man is pursuing me and wants to take me to bed on the first date doesn't mean I am going to submit to his flattering advances. Why not? Because no matter how much my ego wants its genetically and culturally induced high, I don't want to get pregnant or catch yucky germs.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 6 days ago in reply to this

          Dogs are aware.  Spiders are aware, and flies.  Plants are aware, and react when the sun comes up.

          Are you sure you wish to define consciousness as being aware?

          1. ptosis profile image77
            ptosisposted 5 days ago in reply to this

            She is using a Victorian definition. Freud initially attempted to subdivide the mind purely in terms of different levels of consciousness.

            As we now know today  everything Freud thought was true was wrong.What is Victorian Consciousness?   Freud groped towards an understanding of the mind. But one thing he was certain of was that the unconscious, the deeper levels of the mind speak.

            Most of what we do, Freud would consider unconsciousness.

            Useless factoid -
            Your finger touches something hot, you pull back, you ask the person,; "Why did you pull back?" They would respond, "Because it was HOT!"

            But you explain, your finger and arm pulled back 256ms before the signal reached into your frontal cortex for you to become conscious of the heat. You pulled back before you so-called ego realized what was even happening!


            "If, then, our cognitive capacities were simply evolved dispositions, there would be no way of knowing which of these capacities lead to true beliefs and which to false ones. As the philosopher Thomas Nagel points out, there would be no basis on which to trust reason itself. To accept the truth of reasoning, Nagel observes, 'I have to be able to believe… that I follow the rules of logic because they are correct – not merely because I am biologically programmed to do so." - http://www.thegreatdebate.org.uk/ModernTheoryKM.html

            Silly Question: Is a zombie self aware?

            Elon Musk believes that we are all in a simulation!

        2. BuddiNsense profile image61
          BuddiNsenseposted 5 days ago in reply to this

          Yes, and that part other than genetics is called environment.
          I still don't understand the 'purity of consciousness/awareness'.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
            Kathryn L Hillposted 5 days ago in reply to this

            pure consciousness is that part of ourselves which is uninfluenced by genetics or environment. For instance, a baby at birth has perfect and pure consciousness. He is just beginning to relate to his body and his environment. As he grows he becomes increasingly aware of himself in relation to every person and situation he encounters through his senses. Maybe pure consciousness is that which precedes the brain, body and senses.
            I just know that I have it.

            1. BuddiNsense profile image61
              BuddiNsenseposted 5 days ago in reply to this

              So pure consciousness means pure awareness.... the knowledge that one is alive, that is there for everyone, every living thing with a brain.
              Without body there is no awareness, so your opinion that consciousness is before body is just that, an opinion, for consciousness is the awareness(you said that) of a body of itself.
              A baby at birth is already influenced by genes and maternal uterine environment. He is not able to distinguish himself from rest because of the underdevelopment of brain. Buddhist who meditate can switch of that part of brain and feel oneness. Some drugs too do that.

              1. ptosis profile image77
                ptosisposted 5 days ago in reply to this

                Wow. I didn't kbow that. Could never figure out what was meant by "emptying your mind". Could never shut off internal dialogue. Huh.

                1. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                  which drugs? LSD?

                2. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                  it more like focusing on what really exists: the essence of Life, pure ...

 
working