A deer was promenading in a jungle; suddenly he saw a lion, coming from opposite direction. He leaped and ran away into the thick bushes of jungle.
What should we name the action of deer?
Natural reaction?
Will?
Reason of Action
“The humans presume themselves to have free will, he argues, is a result of their awareness of appetites while being unable to understand the reasons why they want and act as they do”
If a human decides not to go towards the danger, isn’t like the action of deer? Why not?
He just has the feeling of free will (near Spinoza the knowledge of the reason of action), instead of the will itself. When we decide, actually we just understand the characteristics of our action, whatever we do, we just know that why we do, and we presume it as a free will.
However, there is a thing seeable. Skeptically speaking, rebuffing the offer of enjoying sex is something different than the reaction of deer or avoidance from danger. It’s a pure human action instead of natural reaction, because we take this action occasionally by Mind in preference to Body. Maybe this is free will. When I observe it, I feel it an action of will.
Intuition Is the Developed Form of Perception, Bergson
Hi raidon04!
Wonderful! Your very true scrutiny made me clear for many things; especially “the refusal of confirmation” does make very good sense.
I see the will in nature like this,
- Instinctive will
- Cognizant will
- Impromptu will
As Bergson recognized the intuition is the developed form of perception. A chick identifies the place to hide when he is in danger, this is instinctive will.
A person has the knowledge of the injuriousness of smoking and he decides to smoke or not to smoke, this is cognizant will. A person knows that electric shock causes the death and he decides to touch or not to touch the naked wire, this is another example of cognizant will.
A child who was told the harmfulness of fire, was only at the second stage of cognizant will, but when he got experience, he touched the fire and felt pain, he is cautious now. He never touches the fire intentionally. His action to keeping him away from the fire is impromptu will; it is just like intuitive now. Likewise, there are some cases of insane persons, they have no experience of sex before, but when, they taste it once, they become mad for it, though they don’t have the rationality of intercourse.
Repetition of Actions
Therefore at the stage of cognizant will, practice and repetition of same actions makes the person’s actions spontaneous rather than impromptu. The little difference between impromptu and spontaneous can be seen in following example.
We learn car driving; we repeat our actions as J.B. Watson experimented a lot. When we are much experienced at it. We don’t think we are driving. We drive unintentionally. This action is spontaneous. On the other hand a shocked person keeps away himself from the same shock unintentionally. He doesn’t repeat his action. Usually in children, this kind of natural fear has been observed when they are shocked, once, by something they keep themselves away forever from that thing. This is, in my view, impromptu will which is same like intuition. I imagine the order of wills in nature, like this,
Instinctive will …… Cognizant will ……… Impromptu will
Instinctive will: The example of chick and deer
Cognizant will: The example of smoker
Impromptu will: the example of fire and insane sex mate
So the deed of rationality of mind is either a state of instinct. The theory of sub-consciousness doesn’t defy the intuition rather it supports it at all. An action of deer as well as the action of president Obama of fighting the elections is same in nature, but at different stages.
But the refusal of the offer of sex intentionally (while everything is ok), is still very much mysterious and different from all this stuff, because by deep analysis you will see the supernatural will in it. And it’s only particular with human males?