The Free Will Debate (2020) by Daniel Sanderson - #Googleplanksip

All other points on this hypothesis regress to this mean, or central "synthesis-synapse". The monistic, holistic approach to the The Free Will Debate (2020) is rooted in an individual's ability to Deter versus Respond. This is the spectrum to which we all fall. I see further than Hannah Arendt’s cyclical Natality of Newness, with action circumventing laws of probability, the data reveals patterns. Over time, the patterns reveal compelling categories of  Preventative “action” (sometimes in an Arendt sense) versus  Reactionary responses. Why the temporal aspect? As long as our consciousness (individual and collective) exists (as we know it), will Existentialism persist? Personal and social responsibility is foundational to freedom (the ability and opportunity to respond),  Only time will tell. Thomas Aquinas points to the creation of man as the beginning. Nothing insightful here, although it is the starting of the divergence from the doctrines of the Church, this beginning was a birth in itself. A natalism which Arendt would have seen as cyclical? Does this play into the hand of Christianity or Eastern philosophies when the Descent of man falls down the rabbit hole of birth, rinse, re-birth, repeat?

Support Your Friendly Neighbourhood Atelier Today!