Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Food For Thought:
A general question was brought up in class the other day, and I think that it has an interesting and compelling argument to it. The original question started in our text asking: Do we have free will? As if this question wasn't difficult enough to wrap your head around, the more relevant question to my interests that was spawned from this was: "Do we think as a free mind, or are our thoughts provoked by others?" This question was one that I had underestimated, for it argues whether or not our personal creativity is something that we come up with, or rather something that is brought on by another’s actions. Now that I have had the time to think it over though, here is my response: I think that it is a combination of both that adds progress to human development. For we could by no possible means think up everything that is going on in the modern day world nor put it into action by ourselves; but at the same time the world that we take part in everyday has been produced. Thus my response becomes relevant, for what I feel is that the singular person can think on his own with a free mind, but there would be no growth for that person without a partner in crime to validate the process and let that thought grow. Without the input and critique of another, there can be only so much that would develop from such an individual idea. Therefore, we can think and produce thoughts on our own, but they can only be improved by the thoughts of others. Any takers?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Are we capable of free will? For some, every thought or action is a result of some other thought or action, causality. If this is true, is it even possible to have free will since thought predates our individual exstence? It's a hard arguement to disprove, but I've always had two problems with it...
ReplyDeleteFirst, IF every thought or action is ONLY a result of another thought or action... how is it possible that there was ever a FIRST thought or action? If cause is the only way for it to have happened, what "caused" the first one?
Second, it's an excuse for anyone. Let's say you decide to do something bad or evil... if you're thoughts and actions are all a result of something else, there is always the arguement of non-responsibility. How can you be held accountable if you had no free choice in the matter, and that being the case, how can you be held responsible for the thought or action?
Ahh the Chicken or the Egg my friend. For just the fact that the chicken produces the egg to continue its species does not mean that the egg could have come into existence without the chicken. It is just a matter of happenstance that the chicken developed over time to produce the egg to continue its kind. Thus not every action can be directly compared to a previous or even relevant action.
ReplyDelete