To keep it simple, there were no emotions involved in doing what I did, but logical reasons, and it was really a smoke that one blows into a snake hole to awaken and bring out a snake. Basically make one realize the folly of getting entangled with emotions, emotionally. Well, I really don’t want to talk any further on the subject… that’s all… because it might trigger yet another futile discussion, and self-centered justifications.What interested me, if you'd care to quote me properly, is your lack of explanations, a lack filled with vague conflicting remarks. That's why I asked further detailed explanation
in my first post here. Is it so hard to keep it simple?
Yes, I do have the right to remain silent, and I can do that by not replying at all, but I’m not the kind of person who even thinks in terms of – “none of your business†Dude, but some times, silence in certain areas is golden. I think you should agree.You have the right to remain silent and say "non of your business" in which case I wish you all the best, again.
I did not mean to demean your very first post in any way, but how could you think that I think in those terms? Haven’t you known me even to that extant? I start very few threads, and in one of those I try to show how causality itself creates freewill. Didn’t I? If you do not agree because of my lack of a proper explanation or whatever reasons, at least you should know that I do not think in terms of “causality means absolute bondage, slaveryâ€, because I AM a thing, and causality has provided ME with certain causally created attributes, and one of them is reasoning, and although that works on the basis of causality, it is the reasoning of a particular thing, and the reasoning of that particular thing has been made capable of accepting or rejecting abstract concepts as THAT thing. So that thing becomes necessarily responsible as far as HIS reasoning goes, not causalities! Is causality bloody thinking or a particularly, causally created, THING?
I tried to see if freewill exists, and if it did, how can freewill make sense without violating the law of causality, and the above makes sense to me, because not only does freewill fit in, but i saw that causality actually creates it, and we don’t see that, because we thing of causality as a one-way street and nothing can turn back, but it does, in me saying NO, which is not going in reverse as such, but still actually forward, but that there were many possible directions, and “Iâ€, a causally created thing, reject and choose, without being disconnected from causality as such.
I have mentioned many a times that I use emotions logically, for I know what both are, and that one can never ever get rid of either, hence using emotions logically means that reasoning always remains a degree higher than emotions, so how could emotions ever get the better of ME? Emotions cannot be removed, but can be ruled, absolutely.