From: BrettMan35@webtv.net (Brett Robertson) Date sent: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 16:59:37 -0500 (EST) To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com Subject: virus: Will (was Bohm: Flow) Send reply to: firstname.lastname@example.org
> It is not easy to say where will originates. I have met people who use
> their will to "go against the flow" (which suggests that will is
> distinct from simple cause-and-effect). Still, to say that everything
> originates within a flow-- or to say that everything is caused and so
> might have a logical effect-- is to say that will ALSO has some
> connection to a source of power. So, perhaps one way to distinguish
> will from intent is to differentiate between necessity and contingency?
> Remember, intent-- as I use it-- implies that objects have certain
> properties and that their action is *intentional* if it necessarily
> follows from these properties (ie. a ball rolls with intentionality
> since the action, rolling, naturally follows from the property, round;
> thus, there is a force of necessity that may NOT involve will). And
> though the objective properties of humans are complex; human intent
> should also act in line with this nature-- thus would not necessitate
But no one else uses intentionality that way, and they're not going to change for you, Buttster. Following is the DicDef.
Main Entry: inĚtenĚtionĚal
Pronunciation: in-'tench-n&l, -'ten(t)-sh&-n&l Function: adjective
Date: circa 1727
1 : done by intention or design : INTENDED <intentional damage> 2 a : of or relating to epistemological intention b : having external reference
synonym see VOLUNTARY
- inĚtenĚtionĚalĚiĚty /-"ten(t)-sh&-'na-l&-tE/ noun - inĚtenĚtionĚalĚly /in-'tench-n&-lE, -'ten(t)-sh&-n&l-E/ adverb
> This is to say: "Will" further suggests that the potential to act is
> contained as a type of energy within *B*eings (As a life force?). Using
> the will, then, a Being may direct this force (ex. through *work*). The
> question becomes: "If 'will' implies the personal use of energy to
> accomplish an action; then, does this suggest that the action taken is
> opposed to a larger intentionality?"
No, it means that in order to change the world, one must begin from within the world in which one finds oneself prior to one's effort to effect such change. Sheesh! You never DO get any better, do you? If I'm rolling a rock up a mountain, you would call the gravitational force against which I strived "intentional"! This implies that the mountain thinks and wills, which mountains do not do, and the former of which you do poorly.
> (ex. A person uses some effort to
> push a ball uphill. Doesn't this suggest that the person who "wills"
> that the ball move uphill must also use force in a way which is opposed
> to the natural intent... of the ball? ... of the person who wills?).
No, balls, boulders and rocks do NOT possess "intent" (it is not "natural" to them, or for them to possess it). It is dicdeffed as
Main Entry: 1inĚtent
Etymology: Middle English entent, from Old French, from Late Latin intentus, from Latin, act of stretching out, from intendere Date: 13th century
1 a : the act or fact of intending : PURPOSE; especially : the design or purpose to commit a wrongful or criminal act <admitted wounding him with intent> b :
the state of mind with which an act is done : VOLITION 2 : a usually clearly formulated or planned intention : AIM 3 a : MEANING, SIGNIFICANCE b : CONNOTATION 3 synonym see INTENTION
Main Entry: inĚtenĚtion
Date: 14th century
1 : a determination to act in a certain way : RESOLVE 2 : IMPORT, SIGNIFICANCE
3 a : what one intends to do or bring about b : the object for which a prayer, mass, or pious act is offered
4 : a process or manner of healing of incised wounds 5 : CONCEPT; especially : a concept considered as the product of attention directed to an object of knowledge 6 plural : purpose with respect to marriage synonyms INTENTION, INTENT, PURPOSE, DESIGN, AIM, END, OBJECT, OBJECTIVE, GOAL mean what one intends to accomplish or attain. INTENTION implies
little more than what one has in mind to do or bring about <announced his intention to marry>. INTENT suggests clearer formulation or greater deliberateness
<the clear intent of the statute>. PURPOSE suggests a more settled determination <being successful was her purpose in life>. DESIGN implies a more carefully
calculated plan <the order of events came by accident, not design>. AIM adds to these implications of effort directed toward attaining or accomplishing <her
aim was to raise film to an art form>. END stresses the intended effect of action often in distinction or contrast to the action or means as such <willing to use any
means to achieve his end>. OBJECT may equal END but more often applies to a more individually determined wish or need <his constant object was the
achievement of pleasure>. OBJECTIVE implies something tangible and immediately attainable <their objective is to seize the oil fields>. GOAL suggests something
attained only by prolonged effort and hardship <worked years to reach her goals>.
> I say that will is ALWAYS opposed to intent; thus, it originates from--
> and, ultimately, "benefits"-- only the individual who wills.
You say a lot of stupid things. Will is the engine which drives intent; the force propelling intent in the direction of its chosen goal.
> this understanding also suggests that force is always required by the
> one who wills. Thus, the human-- as a self-contained "system"-- must
> eventually use his own energy to affect all changes whereby reality
> might conform to will. Such individuals thereby deplete their reserve
> of energy-- and so deplete their life-force (the force contained by the
> system is eventually re-directed to the flow from which it originated).
People get tired when they work, and get old regardless. Simple. Inevitable. Elementary.
> As such, I assume that will is allowed through "contingency" (or
God's grace, or the Buttster's? my vote is - Neither. Grace is another one of your schizophrenically fixated terms.
> and that the intentionality exemplified by cause-and-effect
> eventually directs it toward a necessary end (or else intent must
> override will-- to the detriment of the system whose energies are not
> aligned with this intent.., even, or especially, those systems which
> might be entirely self-contained and [incorrectly] presumed to be "self"
Intent does not "override" will; it is what furnishes blind will with a direction and/or goal. They are complementaries, not contradictories, so they combine rather than collide. You're mindfucked, as usual, Buttster.
> Brett Lane Robertson
> Indiana, USA
> MindRecreation Metaphysical Assn.
> BIO: http://members.theglobe.com/bretthay
> Put your item up for auction! Bid on hot opportunities! Click HERE to
> view great deals!: