Free will and determinism*
According to SoL (School of Life), the debate between free will and determinism has been crossing the Philosophy History since the beginning until our time reaching even the neuroscientists. It concerns about whether the human being is able to dominate their actions by themselves or they are determined by forces beyond their control, like fate and politics. SoL argues that the long running arguments in favor or against both sides are not conclusive because they are based on objective variables when they should be thought as what is relevant to me (to me… to me?). Also, they vary from person to person guided by two psychological aspects: defeatism and aspiration.
Does the course of our life belong to the others, like our parents, bosses and so on or can we change our life and our relationships based on our strenght and free will? The second should be even better but more difficult, of course. So moving far from the old and objective discussion and changing the parameters of the question, we need to think where we should be between these limits to avoid suffering and to become more fulfilled. However, an old Greek schools can help us how to work out navigating between free will and determinism. This ancient school is called stoicism[1].
SoL showed that the stoic way of life points out that we need to understand the behavior of the nature and the things and avoid acting or reacting over the unchangeable conditions. However, it does not mean we are passive but it is a way to avoid being rebel against immutable events, losing time and power. More than a dog that do not understand the connection among the things and the facts[2] the humans have the reason – the main difference between animals and us and the instrument to theorize with considerable accuracy over the possibilities, increasing our freedom in a way that we can compare an take care about our desire and what is possible in our reality.
So, SoL showed the equilibrated and moderated speech of stoicism but we cannot forget that we can be radical sometimes and try to change the reality and the establishment as Vladimir Safatle can advise us in his book “The left who is not afraid to say his name” or “Conversations with Žižek” – where we can find how to risk the impossible putting away standardized positions. But this is subject of another investigation.
*School Of Life Digests. The source of the content showed here can be found over YouTube in the URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYWiIWpcCIM.
[1] Some of their representatives are Zeno of Citium, Seneca (a Nero´s tutor), Epictetus – that was born slave in Greek, and Marcus Aurelius – the imperator. (Osborne, Richard. Philosophy for beginners, 1992.)
[2] And here SoL quoted the classical example of a dog that is tied to an unpredictable chariot. He fights against the tie all the time without knowing its condition and prediction where the chariot is going.
Does the course of our life belong to the others, like our parents, bosses and so on or can we change our life and our relationships based on our strenght and free will? The second should be even better but more difficult, of course. So moving far from the old and objective discussion and changing the parameters of the question, we need to think where we should be between these limits to avoid suffering and to become more fulfilled. However, an old Greek schools can help us how to work out navigating between free will and determinism. This ancient school is called stoicism[1].
SoL showed that the stoic way of life points out that we need to understand the behavior of the nature and the things and avoid acting or reacting over the unchangeable conditions. However, it does not mean we are passive but it is a way to avoid being rebel against immutable events, losing time and power. More than a dog that do not understand the connection among the things and the facts[2] the humans have the reason – the main difference between animals and us and the instrument to theorize with considerable accuracy over the possibilities, increasing our freedom in a way that we can compare an take care about our desire and what is possible in our reality.
So, SoL showed the equilibrated and moderated speech of stoicism but we cannot forget that we can be radical sometimes and try to change the reality and the establishment as Vladimir Safatle can advise us in his book “The left who is not afraid to say his name” or “Conversations with Žižek” – where we can find how to risk the impossible putting away standardized positions. But this is subject of another investigation.
[1] Some of their representatives are Zeno of Citium, Seneca (a Nero´s tutor), Epictetus – that was born slave in Greek, and Marcus Aurelius – the imperator. (Osborne, Richard. Philosophy for beginners, 1992.)
[2] And here SoL quoted the classical example of a dog that is tied to an unpredictable chariot. He fights against the tie all the time without knowing its condition and prediction where the chariot is going.
Comments
Post a Comment