The Will
I trust myself. If my body tells me that I am hungry, I trust that I am receiving this sensation because I really am hungry and that I should perform the action that would relieve my hunger.
If I suddenly feel pain in my hand, I trust that there is something on my hand causing the sensation and that I should perform the action that would remove this pain.
Why then should I refrain from other actions? What differentiates one impulse where I am expected to employ my will to resist the urge from something else such as hunger?
Tarun
Feb 22, 11:23 AM
Logic and rationality are often excuses to justify groupthink.
Whether we do something or not depends only on the magnitude of the desire. Logic comes later, for justification and pacification.
We refrain from some actions, because
1. other people tell us so
2. some ‘inner voice’ or self-doubt tells us otherwise
oliver taylor
Feb 22, 11:36 AM
Everything in life is a choice, even if a gun is to our head there is a choice (to do it, or die). So we are not so much guided by our desires or impulses, but by the consequences of those choices. Specifically, we are guided by what we think are acceptable consequences to those actions.
People who eat junk food every day don’t do it because they simply want it (we all want it), they do it because they are willing to accept the consequences of that action. It’s the same with every choice we ever make.
There are times when lovers have the impulse to cheat on each other, but they don’t do it because they are not willing to deal with the consequences (guilt for instance).
Karmadude
Feb 22, 12:36 PM
The question as I understand it is not about why we do certain actions, but why we don’t? We refrain from doing certain actions because of laws, social and cultural constrains, religions limitations, and the boundaries defined by others and us—all of which makes us Human. I wonder what it will be like to be as free as a bird, just the rules I am born with, which govern everything I do.
Oliver, I don’t think people who eat junk food, eat it because they accept the consequences, but could be a lot of factors, low cost, convenience, addiction, and more. Accepting the consequences is probably the least of those reasons.
Steve
Feb 24, 05:43 AM
I think that Oliver is right when he says that we are motivated by consequences. What I would add to that would be the difference between real consequences and perceived consequences.
An Islamist extremist may be willing blow him/herself up in the belief they’ll end up in paradise. Whether or not they really get there is another matter.
Thame
Feb 24, 11:47 AM
Good points, including the comment about junk food. Eating alone may not include an action of the will, but the decisions involved do and seem to be based on the action’s consequences.
Atul
Feb 24, 02:46 PM
I think people perform certain detrimental actions because they only think of immediate ramifications, not long term ones. Buying something on credit that you can’t afford, smoking cigarettes or eating junkfood feels good now so why not do it? “I’ll worry about the long-term consequences later.” We are a society that seems to want immediate gratification. Many corporations seems to have the same affliction. Let’s just lay people off now to improve our quarterly results. It doesnt’ matter how it affects long term competitiveness, employee morale, or likelihood that the company will have the right people when conditions get better.
As for sucicidal bombings, I think that falls in a different category of choice since it is based on faith, not logic.
– Atul
Thame
Feb 25, 11:20 AM
“We are a society that seems to want immediate gratification.”
That makes sense. In addition to making business decisions with only the short-term in mind, corporations also advertise their products as a way to immediately satiate their customer’s wants. The proof of the junk-food example is that a majority of people in the United States are overweight (American Obesity Association).
Eric. I
Mar 5, 06:59 PM
The question you ask is complex, and I would say that not all impulses and refrained actions are on a equal playing field. Hunger is in large part biological: Your brain monitors glucose levels, ghryelin hormone, among other levels and creates the sensation of hunger. But other situations are not so biological. I would say that wanting to rob a bank has little biological source (beyond a shot of adrenaline) and therefore it is easier to avoid doing.
The laws of society also would prevent many from robbing banks. We are very much a product of our society and others around us. We are imprinted to take the role of others and therefore judge our own actions. If you don’t believe society has an impact then answer these questions: Is cannibalism right? If you’re religious, why do you believe in God? I think everyone will say that cannibalism is wrong despite the fact that many societies see no harm in cannibalism. Many also believe in God, but if it weren’t for society or culture there would be no God for you because you would never have thought of the concept (in all of its current bible-like details). So society restrains us; in fact the foremost purpose of society is to restrain us.
Much of our thinking is also unconscious, as evidenced by countless psychological tests. The unconscious makes many of our choices without thinking (hey I think i’ll get a bag of chips). The spotlight of consciousness isn’t there a lot of the time. Hence, you can resist some urges, but others you willfully accept without even considereing them.
Eric. I
Mar 5, 07:04 PM
“We are a society that seems to want immediate gratification.”
I also agree with this assessment. I wanted to add that many studies have shown that the highest achievers delay instant gratification for the larger, and further away, goals that people work towards.
I’ll let everyone come to their own conclusions about how that relates to society at large …
Thame
Mar 6, 07:42 AM
I think everyone will say that cannibalism is wrong despite the fact that many societies see no harm in cannibalism…So society restrains us; in fact the foremost purpose of society is to restrain us.
I definitely agree and the example of cannibalism is a powerful one. The connection between societal pressures and our will (to either resist these pressures or force ourselves to abide by them) is an interesting subject to explore.
If delaying or banning our “natural” tendency for instant gratification in favor of long-term goals is linked to success, then a person’s will would be a measure of their potential for achievement.
Crap, I have to go to class. I’ll finish this though later :D