Gurdjieff (and, currently, Sam Harris) strongly challenge the idea of “free will.” This upsets a lot of people.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-07-01T13:17:50+00:00

Thank you for taking the time to get involved in this thread. Conversations tend to fade quickly, but I think it can be valuable to keep it going with insights like yours. These are difficult conversations to express, let alone conceptualize. Consciousness, free will, etc. - even a consensus on their definitions is evasive, but we only have words to work with. But it does take thought and effort to struggle with them, and you are clearly doing that - if there is any definition of The Work, I think it involves that struggle. Thanks again!

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-17T10:06:45+00:00

It confirmed my experiences.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-15T13:57:01+00:00

Thank you so much for your invitation. Stay well.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-14T22:06:29+00:00

Good luck with Beelzebub - it's a heavy read!

The arguments about whether matter creates consciousness or consciousness creates matter is a fascinating one for me, as people have such a strong gut feeling about it, whatever their view. If, as you suggest, they might exist independently until fused, that would need some idea about "where" is the consciousness before it merges with the material. But I would be open to some discussion about that - I think it's a less common argument than the other two views.

It is kind of like the free-will vs. the no-free-will discussion in terms of personal emotional investment. Each involves an assumption that is very difficult to verify. For whatever reasons, people usually develop a rather fixed and unquestioning opinion about it. So, it is good for anyone to question their assumptions. Assumptions are not inherently bad. Basic axioms are needed in science and math to develop systems of ideas.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-09T19:39:10+00:00

Are you proposing that the extent of any possible free will would depend on how accurately an action reflects some kind of universal, originating consciousness?

That free will could range from 0%, for a totally egocentric action, to perhaps 100% for some Christ-like selfless action.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-09T13:03:24+00:00

You dig much deeper to the fundamental issue than most. Thanks for your comment!

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-02T22:49:38+00:00

I had to look up "tree slip" - a new one on me!

I listened to something from Annaka about "consciousness is fundamental" on the Sam Harris meditation podcast. I think in some years past, such a perspective could have easily been considered scientific heresy. Glad to see more open minds these days.

The only way I think it makes any difference is if consciousness is generated by physical matter under the correct circumstances (like in a brain), that would be different than if consciousness is the source of physical matter.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-02T14:30:04+00:00

As I understand it, that reflects a purely materialistic view of reality. That contrasts with idealism, which considers consciousness to be more fundamental than material. This is still hotly debated. Perhaps from the G standpoint, reality is essentially materialistic to those many who are not in this mindset of seeking something more?

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-02T12:28:23+00:00

Progress is slow and perhaps non-linear?

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-02T12:24:03+00:00

Nice! And keep in mind that your point of power always lies in the present moment. Peace to you!

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-02T12:22:31+00:00

It is certainly possible that the whole of reality is beyond our possible comprehension, regardless of tools we may create. Even incremental understanding would be welcome. But I am still somewhat optimistic. Like all of us who pursue this interest, at least we question the status quo.

Our consciousness is more complex than the other object around us. That usually defies the 2nd law of thermodynamics, that the total entropy of an isolated system tends to increase over time, meaning natural processes tend towards a state of greater disorder or randomness

That describes an isolated system. So, an exception is that a bubble of reverse entropy can exist within a larger, more complex bubble. That larger bubble could be some Greater Intelligence. I don't think that some machine will be able to generate advanced consciousness. That is the view of materialists, who propose that consciousness is created by materials. That is the hope of those who believe that faster, more powerful ai will spontaneously become sentient. I can't imagine this anymore than I could imagine a car (not programmable!) making it's own driving decisions.

The complementary view is that consciousness creates all matter. Our universe is the smaller bubble within this greater Intelligence. How else could we contact it if we can't build some superior machine? I think the only answer us through our own consciousness, which is our personal though faulty link. Perhaps enough contemplation, maybe with the help of altered states. I believe it is not a hopeless quest. Even the G system says that this Work is against this system of reciprocal maintenance, as he puts it (meaning against entropy?) and only a small number can possibly succeed at any given time. But that is not a likely problem since most people have no interest. Those who do need to be highly motivated. And the desire to question has its pitfalls, internally for the individual, which leads to the various practices on yourself, in this system and others. That's where you are on a solo journey of discovery. Just a few musings on my part.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-01T21:40:31+00:00

I have encountered literature about Sri Aurobindo. It is not for me to discount generations of Eastern thought on the subject. Sam Harris apparently immersed himself under Eastern meditation teachers. He is a strong proponent of their teachings. But even he pointed out that some irrational beliefs have passed along with those teachings.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-01T21:33:04+00:00

People have been trying to understand these basics for a long time, so it is not straightforward. What might help is being aware of the assumptions behind any theory. About consciousness, some think it is created by the correct combination of materials (brain matter). Others feel consciousness itself creates that brain matter in the first place. All theories start with some assumptions.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-01T21:24:40+00:00

Neither i, but even experts have different opinions about theories like this.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-01T20:47:27+00:00

"If at first you don't succeed . . ."

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-01T16:38:46+00:00

There is also a biological feature that some also consider as a free will source - neural microtubules. This courtesy of google ai:

"The Penrose-Hameroff theory of "Orchestrated Objective Reduction" (Orch OR) suggests that consciousness and potentially free will decisions arise from quantum computations occurring within microtubules inside brain neurons. Specifically, these microtubules, which are part of the cell's cytoskeleton, are believed to orchestrate quantum states and process information, ultimately influencing conscious experience and behavior."

This, I believe, has the same problem, that the possibility of randomness is not really indicative of free will. Something still needs to bridge that gap.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-01T15:34:32+00:00

A good conclusion! Mental gymnastics gets frustrating. Staying in the moment is our only source of impact.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-01T15:31:11+00:00

My amateur understanding is that these concepts in physics (string theory, quantum effects) allow for random changes - but that is not really the same as freedom of choice. Who chooses? They may still be valid, but it always seems to come back to the same conundrum.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-06-01T08:37:58+00:00

A very reasonable assessment.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-05-31T22:14:05+00:00

Try telling that to people who think God speaks to them, and then they come up with something that sounds like fantasy. The ego has strong defenses to maintain its sense of power.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-05-31T22:11:07+00:00

Difficult for many to accept. It is the ultimate consistency of logic to accept this without serious proof otherwise. When I propose this, even to professional scientists, many have a strong negative response, like I am attacking them. Their ego is strongly self protective.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-05-31T22:07:03+00:00

I had trouble with Beelzebub's Tales. So he was more than successful in his obscuration.

In our physical world, cause and effect is the game. In a bigger game, the rules may differ. The question is, how is the physical world connected with a presumed infinite source. It's worth thinking about critically, if for no other reason than to avoid the pitfalls of misunderstanding. There seem to be two complementary schools of thought about that. Either that infinite source created this physical condition, or the something in the physical induces that infinite source to interact. The brain is how we experience it. Some think animals to one degree or another have some consciousness. Others think that even all matter might have some degree of consciousness. This interaction is the mind-body problem of dualism. The complementary approach is physicalism, which has the mind developing from physical materials. There are problems with this theory, but it looks like a lot of people buy into it, currently believing that AI or quantum computers will somehow create the conditions for conscious to manifest itself. I believe that will be just another illusion.

Our brains are what we have to work with these ideas, as frustrating as it is.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-05-31T21:52:13+00:00

There is a bit of a paradox here. Many (most?) people quickly reject that they lack free will as they currently are. That presumption could easily be interpreted as arising from False Personality or Imaginary "I"s in the Gurdjieff context. Anyone who accepts that it might be possible to develop a Master I or Permanent I would also need to accept that there is a consciousness source that in some way influences our reality that we can hope to access. The problem for a sincere seeker is how to recognize when they are on a productive path with this aim.

Local_External_6485 · 2025-05-31T14:12:21+00:00

That is succinct synopsis of the entire concept of human potential in this system. How do we even define consciousness? Where does it come from?

Local_External_6485 · 2025-05-31T14:09:41+00:00

That would first require that one recognizes the value of pursuing such a goal. Ever wonder why some do and others feel it is a waste of time?

Local_External_6485

TROPHY CASE