le cochon bleu
New member
life, just planned circus freak show? Can this be true? The question goes - is this true: - The argument that life is pre-determined and only follows set blueprints written up a long time ago is a red herring. And indeed, although it seems true, the reality is that life seems like that but in fact there is no life at all - so is there no life here?
Going back to the foundations for my question - people have often asked the question: is life causally (pre-) determined, or is there real free will in real time. In other words, has life in this world been chosen or 'set' like a wind-up toy so it's known what will happen on earth, in each person's life, or is that nonsense and that life means instant to instant choices by each person which are their own, valid choices at the time they make them and not before.
So my question is about, well, I'm wondering if it is possible, that, consider that "life" IS in fact pre-determined, but so then this seems to just shows that there is no life - is this the truth - there is no life on earth? Pre-determined "life" cannot admit the real, true concept of life.
My question whittled down simply? Are our existences (better than the term life, as we can be existing as dead droids) pre-determined and a fallacy of what we present earthly life to be, because our pre-determined earthly droid existences can never be actually "alive" or "living". We are malfunctioning machines, malfunctioning because we can not tell the truth about ourselves, and like a deluded charated in a movie who never learns any better, we call ourselves "living beings" when we are not and are only robots - an opposite of living beings.
[* Don't get lost in this first question before my own question though, the way many people do in philosophy. Don't think the only possibility is one or the other totally. See the bottom of the question.]
How about this, can it be true, or possible in reality? An argument can say that life is not really life without free will, without the free agency of the individual being, and anything less is not what we can call life, or a life, or even a being. And then you can wonder that it may easily be that peoples' lives were pre-planned and are just going along in reality according to each plan. This also necessarily means that everything happening to the person was pre-planned, I suppose, that if a person spins dice 10 times every Friday night, the numbers have already been pre-planned. The numbers were known before the spin of the dice. Perhaps it's true, say it is. Doesn't that mean there is no life, rather than there is a pre-planned life? The pre-planned life surely amounts only to everythng that can be called "anti-life" and nothing to what people will tell you make up life, aliveness, being alive, coming alive, when "something is living", being.
I am wondering if there can be a genuine possibility or an argument for another possibility in describing life and "agency" (free agency, or agency of and for other beings, or agency of and for purposes rather than other life forms or a deity / deities).
-----
* From above:
It's very important to say that, typically in philosophical exercise (which must because of this be at least quite ridiculous excercises), a topic from this question can be found seeking to identy x not y, or y not x, when that is a ludicrous pursuit. Often the only true answer can present in being aware that x does not necessarily exclude y as well. Or that both x and y, absolutely or in various degrees or with limitations or indicators, can be true. Though philosophical exercise can often enough be full of examinations of truths, necessary, contingent, whatever, the essential question it seems to seek to answer and the apparent route to answering ignores such possibilites. It is ridiculous, be wary.
Going back to the foundations for my question - people have often asked the question: is life causally (pre-) determined, or is there real free will in real time. In other words, has life in this world been chosen or 'set' like a wind-up toy so it's known what will happen on earth, in each person's life, or is that nonsense and that life means instant to instant choices by each person which are their own, valid choices at the time they make them and not before.
So my question is about, well, I'm wondering if it is possible, that, consider that "life" IS in fact pre-determined, but so then this seems to just shows that there is no life - is this the truth - there is no life on earth? Pre-determined "life" cannot admit the real, true concept of life.
My question whittled down simply? Are our existences (better than the term life, as we can be existing as dead droids) pre-determined and a fallacy of what we present earthly life to be, because our pre-determined earthly droid existences can never be actually "alive" or "living". We are malfunctioning machines, malfunctioning because we can not tell the truth about ourselves, and like a deluded charated in a movie who never learns any better, we call ourselves "living beings" when we are not and are only robots - an opposite of living beings.
[* Don't get lost in this first question before my own question though, the way many people do in philosophy. Don't think the only possibility is one or the other totally. See the bottom of the question.]
How about this, can it be true, or possible in reality? An argument can say that life is not really life without free will, without the free agency of the individual being, and anything less is not what we can call life, or a life, or even a being. And then you can wonder that it may easily be that peoples' lives were pre-planned and are just going along in reality according to each plan. This also necessarily means that everything happening to the person was pre-planned, I suppose, that if a person spins dice 10 times every Friday night, the numbers have already been pre-planned. The numbers were known before the spin of the dice. Perhaps it's true, say it is. Doesn't that mean there is no life, rather than there is a pre-planned life? The pre-planned life surely amounts only to everythng that can be called "anti-life" and nothing to what people will tell you make up life, aliveness, being alive, coming alive, when "something is living", being.
I am wondering if there can be a genuine possibility or an argument for another possibility in describing life and "agency" (free agency, or agency of and for other beings, or agency of and for purposes rather than other life forms or a deity / deities).
-----
* From above:
It's very important to say that, typically in philosophical exercise (which must because of this be at least quite ridiculous excercises), a topic from this question can be found seeking to identy x not y, or y not x, when that is a ludicrous pursuit. Often the only true answer can present in being aware that x does not necessarily exclude y as well. Or that both x and y, absolutely or in various degrees or with limitations or indicators, can be true. Though philosophical exercise can often enough be full of examinations of truths, necessary, contingent, whatever, the essential question it seems to seek to answer and the apparent route to answering ignores such possibilites. It is ridiculous, be wary.