Belief in fiction liberalism.

 Belief in fiction liberalism. 

The world today is dominated by a liberal package of individualism, human rights, democracy, and free markets.


Liberals place a high value on individual freedom because they believe that humans have free will.


It is not an ethical judgment that humans have free will. It is a factual statement about the world.


The contradiction between free will and modern science is the 'laboratory elephant' that many people want to ignore when looking at microscopes and functional magnetic resonance imaging.


Geneticists and brain scientists say "He did it because of the electrochemical processes that take place in the brain, and it's the specific genetic makeup that makes them. And that genetic makeup is a combination of accidental mutations and old evolutionary pressures."


Electrochemical processes in the brain are either deterministic or random. They don't follow free will.


When a neuron fires and emits an electric charge, it may be a deterministic response to an external stimulus or the result of a random event such as the spontaneous decay of a radioactive atom. There is no room for free will on either side.


When people hear such scientific explanations, a common reaction is to ignore them. They say they feel free and act according to their wishes and decisions. Humans act according to their desires. This is true.


If you define 'free will' as the ability to act according to desire, you are correct. Humans have free will, and so do all animals. But the real question is not whether you can act according to your inner desires. The important question is, can they choose their desires in the first place?

​

You feel certain wishes because biochemical processes in your brain create those feelings. Such processes are deterministic or random, not free will. Believing in free will is due to wrong logic.


People take a logical leap with the conclusion that 'If I want to press the switch, that wish is my choice'. This is not true. Don't choose desire. You just feel the desire and act according to it.



How exactly do I choose my desires?


When a thought suddenly pops into your mind, ask yourself: 'Why did I think of this? Did you decide to do this a minute ago and then think about it? Or did the thought just come to my mind without any direction or permission from me? If I were the real owner of my thoughts and decisions, wouldn't I be able to make the decision not to think about anything for the next 60 seconds?' 

Try it out if you can.


Doubting the existence of free will is not simply a philosophical exercise. It means that you can control as well as manipulate the desires of an organism.


Science has weakened not only the belief in the free will of liberalism but also the belief in individualism. Individuals are inseparable beings. But the life sciences have come to the conclusion that the story of liberalism is a complete myth. Indeed, when I look deep within me, the so-called single entity that I take for granted is dispersed into a cacophony of conflicting voices, none of which are 'my true self". Humans are not indivisible beings. Humans are 'shareable beings'.


Through various experiments, science has concluded that there is an inner interpreter. The inner interpreter is always trying to make sense of events in life and uses partial clues to make up a plausible story.


In humans, at least two different selves exist within us. It is the experiencing self and the speaking self. The experiencing self is moment-by-moment consciousness. The experiential ego can't turn the entire episode into a more favourable experience, with a very unpleasant one plus a slightly unpleasant one. The experiencing self remembers nothing. The experienced self does not tell any story, nor is it a reference point when making important decisions.


Recalling memories, telling stories, and making important decisions are all the arbitrariness of a very different entity within us, the 'talking self'. The telling ego is constantly busy inventing stories about the past and making plans for the future. The storyteller doesn't tell the whole story, but usually uses only the important moments and the end result to weave the story.


The value of the entire experience is determined by the average of the important moments and endings.


The talking ego averages the experiences, not the sum of the experiences.


Most of the important choices in life are made by the talking self. However, the experiencing self and the talking self are not separate entities but are closely intertwined. The telling ego uses experience as an important raw material for constructing a story. And those stories influence what the reexperiencing self actually feels.


Nevertheless, most people identify with the self that they are talking about. When we say 'I' we mean not a rush of experiences, but a story in our head. A logical and coherent story with the chaotic life experienced by the ego, the ego identifies us with the internal system. It doesn't matter that today's story doesn't match yesterday's story, because the plot of the story has been rewritten several times that there are many lies and omissions. The important thing is to always feel that you have a single, unchanging identity from birth to death. This feeling creates questionable liberalism that makes me believe that I am an indivisible individual and that I have a clear, coherent inner voice that provides meaning to the entire universe.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fatigue society, excess of positivity, dialectic of positivity.

 Fatigue society, excess of positivity, dialectic of positivity. ​ ​ ​ Each age has its own disease. For example, there is an era that can be said to be bacterial. But this era came to an end, at least with the invention of antibiotics. The beginning of the 21st century can be defined pathologically as neither bacterial nor viral, but rather neurotic. It is an infarct disease, not a contagious disease, and it is a disease caused by an excess of positivity, not the negativity of the immunological other. Therefore, it is by no means governed by immunological techniques aimed at defeating the negativity of others. ​ The last century was the immunological age. In other words, it was an era in which clear boundaries were drawn between the inside and the outside, friends and enemies, and me and others. The essence of immunological behavior is aggression and defense. There is a certain blindness in the essence of these immunological devices that have taken over the entire society from the...
Read more

The Truth of Perspectiveism, Maturana.

 The Truth of Perspectiveism, Maturana. "The observer is the source of all things. Without the observer nothing exists. The observer is the basis of all knowledge. The basis of all claims concerning man himself, the world and the universe. The extinction of the observer is the It will mean an end and annihilation, for there will be no one left to perceive, speak, describe or explain." - <<From Being to Doing>> Maturana ​ Someone is watching something. Marurana says this is a fundamental starting point. The person develops a world of his own as he sees it as an observer. If the other person exists as an observer, then the other person's world exists, and as an observer, the world that that person sees also exists. ​ The philosopher Nietzsche, before Maturana, described this as perspectives. If the term perspectives is difficult to describe, you can borrow the term from Maturana and call it 'observers. ​ ​ Snakes are creatures of a different world from human...
Read more

active reading.

 active reading. We know more about the world than we used to, and you may still think that knowledge is essential to understanding something. But knowledge is no longer as essential for understanding as one-sided thinking. You don't have to 'know' everything about something to 'understand' it. Too much information can actually be an obstacle to understanding something. The present age is overflowing with facts that prevent us from understanding the correct appearance of things due to a lot of information. ​ One of the most active projects of some of the best intellectuals today is to unite views from an intellectual standpoint. Through the Internet, television, radio, and magazines, people are provided with well-organized resources, from clever persuasion to carefully curated information and statistics, to make 'decisions' with little effort. But with effective packaging, viewers, listeners, and readers are sometimes unable to make their own decisions. As i...
Read more