[Free will: color code red]
"I think the rejection of determinism is 90 percent due to one ominous, almost omnipotent mistake, that the thinking human bug tends to make - to not actually count himself in the equation… not even the equation of what he wants, and is.
Because if he would, if he would think of his own actual body when he says “I”, then he would be glad to be able to say that “he” is determined. Determined by his past, and by his parents and his ancestors, which a real human feels in his gut.
All real entities feel their history. Or are connected to it in a way that becomes consciousness in man.
Now, this brings me to the early point we discussed years back; about the relative existence of humans. I used to claim that most people do not fully exist. I think that that has been corroborated in this way.
People who refuse determinism, do not actually exist. They self-value in terms of a modern notion of entity, which has as a property the intangible and unverifiable aspect ‘free will’.
Because none of it is tangible, it is easily interpreted universal.
The next step in this logical argument, which is easy for you but which I draw out for lesser but still sensible minds to catch a glimpse - is to observe that whatever is universal and intangible is indeed fundamentally different from anything particular, anything natural, anything with roots.
We can thus say that the love of free will that is at once the rejection of being determined, is the pathos of a quasi-entity. This is not an insult, as it is the default state man inherited from his words, which made him out of ape.
We have to get, and are getting to an affirmation of the ‘baser’ (or just as well, holier) aspect, the ground, before we can actually use consciousness to shape consciousness so as to apply."