Choice, freewill consequence.
visions from God, Dreams, how much do we read into them? or is it just a cycle of the mind, of time, the thought or want is there, it creeps into our subconscious and festers there where pretty soon it erupts and contaminates the mind?
When people speak of choice and free will, what really to they mean?
Given sensory organs and the sensation of pain and pleasure, we have no free will, memories are stamped in our mind, fears arise, expectations and stereotypes blossom, is it not so?
The ability of the human mind to 'associate' we are always doing it, consciously and subconsciously. But then again is this a defining characteristic of life? What if we could not feel then, were void of likes, dislikes , visions and dreams?
Are our likes and dislikes inherent or simply molded from birth by the society that is irrevocably bonded to our mind.
What if there is only one choice, the choice to exist or to not exist.
How can believers claim to have a vision, if the mind was already seeded with the belief?
The subconscious, it is rather peculiar, how does one know that a vision is really a vision and simply not a reflection of the general consciousness of the mind, time and place?
I was contemplating this and also various novels, why is it that people gather different feelings from it, it our tendency to associate.
The author is a human trying to paint a picture of what sustains their thought, the reader will either comprehend and recognise this or simply be baffled.
It is expected, we are humans, and no matter what no two minds can be exactly alike.
I know that I am stepping into the slightly bizzare here but I am wondering what would the character of a human without any human interaction be like?
I need to know our true nature, does our greed only grow when in the presence of other humans?
I liked the movie lady in the water, the critics hated it, but the what exactly are the critics trained to look for? that is exactly it, they are trained, their feelings are governed for them, can not a movie interest us even if the rest of the world doesn't like it?
And why do they not like it? do they trust the critics?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Without a doubt, a piece of art is bound to be interpreted differently and thus appreciated differently by two mortal minds that are conditioned by different set of circumstances and hence their inferences and the resultant beliefs are bound to vary. Art merely holds up a mirror to what the artist perceives, it is for the audience to make what it wants out of the presentation. Besides there is no absolute value to judge art;; to each his own interpretation and his own resulting pleasure or the lack thereof.
Hi Id, I guess you hit the nail on the head with the word 'conditioned.'
I did some experiments with conditioning animals to light, touch and drugs, all through these I kept on thinking about the absolute lack of independence of the human mind, the formation of thought, fear, wants, etc
Haven't posted in a while...
Post a Comment