Posts by Joshua Hernandez9

redtinker36 said:.. so.. moving on..

.. your will would become .. a force .. only if it could actually put you in question .. .. you know what I mean? .. .. damn it .. that’s the issue ..

.. but look at it this way ..
.. where do you not exist .. ?
.. if you exist where you exist, then you don't exist where you don't .. it’s simple .. hell
.. see .. that’s where flight becomes possible ..
.. you think I’m joking .. ? .. no .. you were wrong .. I am deadly serious ..

.. and one more thing .. after that, I have nothing left to say ..
.. through will .. that neighborly kind .. a force in one direction .. pressure .. striving .. .. it often looks like something is achieved .. .. like .. you lean against a boat and it moves ..
.. but I’m not sure that force is enough ..
.. it often feels like there has to be another one somewhere .. almost an opposite .. one that says .. like .. I don't give a damn ..
.. and it often seems that things are only achieved by .. merging opposites .. like .. you can kill .. but only by merging love and hate ..

.. there .. does it make sense now .. ?

.. I don't think you're messing around at all ..
.. actually .. I get exactly what you mean ..

redtinker36 said:.. so.. moving on..

.. your will would become .. a force .. only if it could actually put you in question .. .. you know what I mean? .. .. damn it .. that’s the issue ..

.. but look at it this way ..
.. where do you not exist .. ?
.. if you exist where you exist, then you don't exist where you don't .. it’s simple .. hell
.. see .. that’s where flight becomes possible ..
.. you think I’m joking .. ? .. no .. you were wrong .. I am deadly serious ..

.. and one more thing .. after that, I have nothing left to say ..
.. through will .. that neighborly kind .. a force in one direction .. pressure .. striving .. .. it often looks like something is achieved .. .. like .. you lean against a boat and it moves ..
.. but I’m not sure that force is enough ..
.. it often feels like there has to be another one somewhere .. almost an opposite .. one that says .. like .. I don't give a damn ..
.. and it often seems that things are only achieved by .. merging opposites .. like .. you can kill .. but only by merging love and hate ..

.. there .. does it make sense now .. ?

.. totally ..
(.. you'll probably say I'm talking nonsense now ..
.. but .. that's exactly what I was looking for ..
.. it's what I needed .. everything felt tangled up like a ball of yarn ..
.. thanks for untangling it for me ..)

.. man .. whatever..
.. i've got this weird idea stuck in my head .. like pure willpower .. just outta nowhere .. like a vector or something ..
.. not even about grinding from point A to point B .. more like .. just snapping .. instantly being at point B because you willed it..

(.. but hey .. feel free to tell me i'm full of it ..)

-- I mean, if you're setting it up as some sort of framework where conversation is even possible...
.. then I wouldn't go as far as calling it "free will"

.. so if that's how it goes .. nothing happens ..
(.. though i guess i wouldn't go as far as calling it "willpower" just yet ..)

.. stop dodging the question .. you said you’d walk me through it .. so let's go .. explain it now ..

.. look, you know I get pretty worked up about how people word things..
.. basically..
.. seriously.. you know I'm sensitive about this whole language thing..
.. it’s not about the goals themselves.. it’s about actually hitting those targets..

.. here..
.. I'm sticking with the wind at my back and just going where the current takes me..

redtinker36 said:.. that urge pulling you toward the fridge... it’s actually the exact same force that keeps you away from it—the one telling you that if you just hold steady, you'll end up fit and healthy enough to make the neighbors jealous..
.. the first impulse is biological.. the second is social.. but there’s a third kind of will altogether.. let's call it.. the will for self-construction..

.. honestly.. "will" is just a word, much like "need," and "need" is just a word, similar to "aspiration".. and "aspiration" is just a word, much like "intent".. so, really, the first mistake is forgetting that will is merely a linguistic label..
.. the primary rule of science is to call things by their true names—not just to dress them up in fancy suits to present them better, but so that the name actually captures the very heart of the thing.. you follow me?

.. so now.. a will for what, exactly?

.. philosophers exist for this very reason.. Nietzsche asked it himself.. a will for what?.. a will to power.. but power over what? To be the boss, perhaps.. or to have the power to turn water into wine..
.. see?.. it's that simple..
.. look, you aren't framing your topics properly.. (.. I know how to do it, but these guys I deal with just don't get it..) .. because the way you pose a question shows you're just spinning your wheels in circles—going nowhere fast—and in the end? You end up with absolutely nothing..
.. I wish I could frame both the questions and the answers more effectively.. damn it..

.. then just post it ..
(.. I actually opened this whole thing for the people .. so everyone could step up ..
.. and for myself .. so I could clear up some bullshit that was totally muddled ..
.. honestly .. other people will slap the truth into you way harder than you'd ever do to yourself)

.. so you think this drive I have is just a power trip ..?

Alright.

Picture someone dealing with OCD—someone who gets this uncontrollable, internal itch to "organize everything."
An urge they just can't switch off.

In a case like that, would you say their "will" is actually baked into the disorder itself, or is it found in the struggle to resist that drive to make everything perfect?

Mark Torres14 said:Let's give this a shot.
The whole idea is just about trying to bring some order to the chaos.

What kind of order though?

lonegardener said:Well, I actually used the word "impulse" rather than "need"—though they’re pretty close. An impulse is essentially an "inclination." A "decision," then, would really just be our "consent" to that inclination; and it's the kind of consent we only become aware of half a second AFTER we've already "decided." This implies that decisions actually happen "on their own" (subconsciously), and we only realize them once the choice is made. From there, it follows that freedom is an illusion, which aligns perfectly with the materialistic view of the world as a collection of matter and energy entirely subject to physical laws—both the ones we know and perhaps some we haven't discovered yet.

By the way, let me reiterate—this whole conclusion triggers some "depressing thoughts" for me, LOL. According to that logic, it simply means my psychological makeup is such that certain ideas produce depressive effects. That's why I say I prefer a mystical explanation, even though I don't actually believe in one. It serves as a sort of "safety valve" so I don't completely lose it.

Hmm.
If you look at it like willpower is some kind of internal force—kind of like an engine just forcing itself to turn—then everything changes. you tooIt’s just like drive—that "vector" that kicks in when you're feeling a need and starts pointing straight toward getting satisfied. How does that even work?
Look—you can't find a single person out there who isn't driven by their own basic needs and urges. It's just how it works.
Hardly anyone actually shows any real willpower—you know, that whole thing where you actually fight your own impulses instead of just letting them run the show? Most people are just slaves to their instincts.

lonegardener said:Well, I actually used the word "impulse" rather than "need"—though they’re pretty close. An impulse is essentially an "inclination." A "decision," then, would really just be our "consent" to that inclination; and it's the kind of consent we only become aware of half a second AFTER we've already "decided." This implies that decisions actually happen "on their own" (subconsciously), and we only realize them once the choice is made. From there, it follows that freedom is an illusion, which aligns perfectly with the materialistic view of the world as a collection of matter and energy entirely subject to physical laws—both the ones we know and perhaps some we haven't discovered yet.

By the way, let me reiterate—this whole conclusion triggers some "depressing thoughts" for me, LOL. According to that logic, it simply means my psychological makeup is such that certain ideas produce depressive effects. That's why I say I prefer a mystical explanation, even though I don't actually believe in one. It serves as a sort of "safety valve" so I don't completely lose it.

Hey!
I dig that slant angle idea—it works.
I actually had a dream pretty much like that last night—weird coincidence. 😁

Look, satisfying those primal drives is basically like a steep hill—you drop a marble at the top and it’s rolling down whether you like it or not.

Will would be like trying to roll a marble uphill—basically a losing battle. 😁

lonegardener said:Well, I actually used the word "impulse" rather than "need"—though they’re pretty close. An impulse is essentially an "inclination." A "decision," then, would really just be our "consent" to that inclination; and it's the kind of consent we only become aware of half a second AFTER we've already "decided." This implies that decisions actually happen "on their own" (subconsciously), and we only realize them once the choice is made. From there, it follows that freedom is an illusion, which aligns perfectly with the materialistic view of the world as a collection of matter and energy entirely subject to physical laws—both the ones we know and perhaps some we haven't discovered yet.

By the way, let me reiterate—this whole conclusion triggers some "depressing thoughts" for me, LOL. According to that logic, it simply means my psychological makeup is such that certain ideas produce depressive effects. That's why I say I prefer a mystical explanation, even though I don't actually believe in one. It serves as a sort of "safety valve" so I don't completely lose it.

You just don't have the drive to be a believer—it's like trying to run a marathon without even putting on your sneakers. 😁

I'm not totally sold on the whole "free will" thing—don't know if we actually have total control—but I do think you can use your own willpower to claw back a bit more freedom than where you started.

lonegardener said:Well, I actually used the word "impulse" rather than "need"—though they’re pretty close. An impulse is essentially an "inclination." A "decision," then, would really just be our "consent" to that inclination; and it's the kind of consent we only become aware of half a second AFTER we've already "decided." This implies that decisions actually happen "on their own" (subconsciously), and we only realize them once the choice is made. From there, it follows that freedom is an illusion, which aligns perfectly with the materialistic view of the world as a collection of matter and energy entirely subject to physical laws—both the ones we know and perhaps some we haven't discovered yet.

By the way, let me reiterate—this whole conclusion triggers some "depressing thoughts" for me, LOL. According to that logic, it simply means my psychological makeup is such that certain ideas produce depressive effects. That's why I say I prefer a mystical explanation, even though I don't actually believe in one. It serves as a sort of "safety valve" so I don't completely lose it.

Let’s say the woman isn't even overweight—let's just say she thinks the whole concept of "hunger" is totally blown out of proportion and mostly manufactured by society.😁
Maybe she just wants to see how far she can push her ability to go without eating anything at all.😁

Willpower is basically just self-force, but if you ask me, unlike an instinct, willpower feels like a civil war inside your own head—like a better version of you is bullying your weaker self into doing something.

I’ve honestly never heard anyone talk about having a "will for food."
Have you ever actually heard someone use the word "will" in that context?
I think there's a massive difference between how we use "willpower" versus "instinct."
Do you even see the distinction? (And if you do, why do you think that is?)

Can we please focus on the things that are actually *of the same nature* for once?

Think about someone struggling with obesity and all the health issues that come with it.

They feel hungry.
Basically, they have this craving for food.

That craving is the trigger—they start plotting how to get their hands on food, focusing on a near-term future where they finally satisfy that urge.
But what actually drives them toward the fridge, the grocery store, or a drive-thru isn't willpower.

Willpower would be the exact thing that stops them from walking to that fridge in the first place.

So, you only really recognize willpower when it's clashing with some intense, primal, or habitual impulse—maybe even a biological one.
Using willpower is basically our way of breaking free from being slaves to whatever we've just accepted as "normal."

Could be about free will—or maybe just what the hell it can actually accomplish.

it’s interesting that you’re framing will as some kind of "need."
(To me, it feels more like a vector. A force pushing in a specific direction.
A need is something that drives you—something you're being pushed by—whereas will is the thing you use to push.
)

(I haven't really organized my thoughts yet, so I'm just throwing out bullet points and letting you guys do the heavy lifting.😁)

look.

we gotta nail down a definition first—then we can see where all those rabbit holes actually lead.

driftingscout8 said:Once upon a time, in a galaxy far, far away... there was this couple. They were obsessed with history and archaeology from the jump; they knew exactly what they wanted to do with their lives. But life happened, and through a series of random turns, she ended up enrolling in an Archaeology program while he went off to the Economics Department. Fast forward twenty years: she’s working at a local museum and teaching high school on the side, while he’s a wealthy executive at a major firm like Goldman Sachs, traveling the globe to see world monuments, funding archaeological expeditions, and spending his downtime collecting and studying rare, high-end artifacts.
The path you think is leading you straight to your goal isn't the only one available. 😉

👍

redharbor11 said:I’ve been spending a lot of time lately weighing my options for grad school, and honestly, I’ve become pretty obsessed with psychology recently. Since graduation is looming closer every single day, I’m starting to get a bit anxious about the practical side of things. What kind of career paths are actually open to someone once they have a degree in clinical psychology? Also, if you had to pick, which US cities are the best places to study this, and what should I expect from the professors there?🤷

hmm... shouldn't you figure out what you actually want to do before picking a major? 🤔

If you're into psychology as a science but don't have a specific career path in mind—and you're willing to grind, stay creative, and stay curious—then research is your lane.

Not sure where you're planning to go to school or if they have a solid selection process—like after freshman year—to funnel people into specialized research tracks (think labs, field studies, etc.).

That's one way to go.

Psychology is huge—you could work for any firm doing public opinion research or similar stuff;

there's work in schools and preschools;

or even high schools as a counselor.

A buddy of mine actually works as an editor for a kids' magazine—they were specifically looking for someone with child psychology expertise for the role.

The psychotherapy routes have already been covered in other threads, so I won't bore you with that again.

.. that whole thing with the fig tree... it's like a curse on the seed itself..
(.. maybe.. you tell me if I'm totally off base..)

.. it follows the seasonal cycle—spring, summer, fall, winter—just spinning endlessly..
.. it's a curse on anyone stuck in that loop, just circling around without any way to actually break out..
.. zero chance of them ever making anything truly their own.. by choice..

.. look .. you're out here calling him an anarchist ..
.. he isn't .. his whole vibe just validates this entire system .. and people see right through it .. WiFi is basically the crown jewel of the internet era right now .. because the web uses it to jack up its own value

.. by acting this way, he’s basically saying .. "this system is essential" .. and that it’s messed up to kick someone out when their whole existence relies on it
.. so .. what you think is anarchism .. is actually the exact opposite
.. that thing you call "fighting for free speech" .. is really just fighting to stay inside a cage .. where actual freedom is impossible .. and there's zero logic that would allow it to exist anyway

.. Jesus is the polar opposite

Jonathan Brooks8 said:To be labeled an anarchist—is that really what we're calling him? Those who crucified him did so precisely because they viewed him as an anarchist, a threat to the established order—though they were fundamentally mistaken—it wasn't that he wanted to tear the system down; it was simply that the system held no interest for him... he never identified as an anarchist, nor did he seek to operate within those structures at all...

.. honestly, I’m just sitting here waiting for the day you finally wrap your head around what some simpleton writes..

(.. though it's pretty funny watching you try so hard to respond to something that's clearly gibberish..)

.. the guy *is* an anarchist..
.. his whole existence was a systematic teardown of the machine..

.. just being someone who functions outside the rules—that's the threat..
.. even the mere idea that a person can live without that structure is a threat to the establishment—if people actually believed it..

.. that's the point.. the fact that he didn't give a damn about the system is exactly what broke it..
.. for crying out loud.. you totally missed the entire premise.. (.. again.. for the millionth time..)

Jonathan Brooks8 said:But how would that actually look in practice—how does one go about "building upon" it?

... so he wrote it... his entire first post is basically just about that—about what needs adding...

(.. his whole opening bit covers that half of the story that gets systematically denied, hidden, and trashed.. by the neighbors.. all just to keep those neighbors happy..)

... and the question of "how"..
.. he's been chewing on it for years.. (.. even if he hasn't tied it back to Jesus yet)..
.. and it runs through pretty much everything he writes..

.. just try picking ten random posts from different threads.. and you'll see he's always circling back to the "how"..

(.. I remember my high school sociology teacher--absolute genius.. I remember him because he'd say: "if you have five solid arguments, don't reach for a sixth one that doesn't hold water."
.. among other things..
.. hardly anyone listened to him.. barely anyone even remembered what he said.. there was a class reunion a few years back, and based on that, it seems like maybe only a couple of us actually paid attention..

.. and this was his style.. he'd walk into class and we'd just start talking..
.. then the next class, he'd ask: "what did we cover last time?" and most kids would just start yelling: "we didn't learn anything last time!"
.. "what do you mean nothing?" he'd ask..
.. and the crowd would go: "nothing.. we just talked.."

.. but for me.. he's where I learned the most interesting stuff..)

.. my take would be ..
.. walking away from .. and letting go of .. the very things you need to exist .. just as you are right now ..

.. there are different ways to die .. and once it's done, the person who did it is gone ..

(.. man .. could you even argue that killing off your old self is the prerequisite for any actual progress ..? .. for any real change at all ..?)