Will (philosophy)
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
| Revision as of 20:42, 25 April 2010 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 08:27, 21 March 2011 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | {{Template}}'''Will''' is a [[philosophy|philosophical]] concept that is defined in several different ways. | + | {{Template}} |
| + | '''Will''' is a [[philosophy|philosophical]] concept that is defined in several different ways. | ||
| ===Will as internal drive=== | ===Will as internal drive=== | ||
Revision as of 08:27, 21 March 2011
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
Will is a philosophical concept that is defined in several different ways.
Contents |
Will as internal drive
Nietzsche defines will similarly to the "any internally motivated action" usage, but more narrowly. In this sense, will is more a "creative spark," a certain independence and stubbornness. A person who chooses not to steal because the Ten Commandments said so would not be exercising their will; neither would someone buying some music because their friends recommended it. Someone who independently forms their own moral system or who composes a musical composition pleasing to themself, however, would be exercising will.
Idealism: Will as all
In idealist models of reality, the material world is either non-existent or a secondary artifact of the "true" world of ideas. In such worlds, it can be said that everything is an act of will. Even if you are arrested by the police, this is actually an act of your will, too; if you didn't want it to happen, you could have decided otherwise. This line of thought is seen among philosophers such as Arthur Schopenhauer in his book The World as Will and Representation; it is also seen in proponents of a mystically-oriented universe such as Aleister Crowley.
Will as thing in itself
Kant's Transcendental Idealism claimed that "all objects are mere appearances [phenomena]." He asserted that "nothing whatsoever can ever be said about the thing in itself that may be the basis of these appearances." Kant's critics responded by saying that Kant had no right, therefore, to assume the existence of a thing in itself. Schopenhauer disagreed with Kant's critics and stated that it is absurd to assume that phenomena have no basis. Schopenhauer proposed that we cannot know the thing in itself as though it is a cause of phenomena. Instead, he said that we can know it by knowing our own body, which is the only thing that we can know at the same time as both a phenomenon and a thing in itself.
When we become conscious of ourself, we realize that our essential qualities are endless urging, craving, striving, wanting, and desiring. These are characteristics of that which we call our will. Schopenhauer affirmed that we can legitimately think that all other phenomena are also essentially and basically will. According to him, will "is the innermost essence, the kernel, or every particular thing and also of the whole. It appears in every blindly acting force of nature, and also in the deliberate conduct of man…." Schopenhauer said that his predecessors mistakenly thought that the will depends on knowledge. According to him, though, the will is primary and uses knowledge in order to find an object that will satisfy its craving. That which, in us, we call will is Kant's thing in itself, according to Schopenhauer.
Free Will
The standard use of this term is as a distinction between internally motivated and caused events and external events. Jumping off a cliff would be an act of free will; accidentally falling or being pushed off a cliff would not be an act of free will.
Some people believe that seemingly "free" actions aren't actually free, or that the entire concept is a chimera. The argument generally goes along the lines that since "internal" beliefs are affected by earlier external events, nothing is truly an internal choice, because everything you do is predetermined. Alternately, if there is no foreordained future, we may be at the mercy of the randomness of chance, which may also negate free will.
In related disciplines
Psychologists also deal with issues of will; some people are highly intrinsically motivated (Nietzsche would approve of them) and do whatever seems best to them, while others are "weak-willed" and easily suggestible (extrinsicly motivated) by society or outward inducement. They also study the phenomenon of Akrasia, wherein people seemingly act against their best interests and know that they are doing so (for instance, restarting cigarette smoking after having intellectually decided to quit). Advocates of Sigmund Freud's psychology stress the importance of the influence of the unconscious mind upon the apparent conscious exercise of will.
The sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies, in analysing group psychology, distinguishes between will directed at furthering the interests of the group (Wesenwille or "essential will"), and will directed at furthering individual goals (Kürwille or "arbitrary will").
See also
