the disadvantage of not believing in free will

topic posted Fri, August 22, 2008 - 11:04 PM by 
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
free will developed as a decoy signal about predictability. the person who claims "i have no free will" is signaling predictability in some ways, and thereby ostensibly stating that their behavior is deeply patterned. i think this negotiation of social predictability is a vital part of the free will construction and its adaptiveness.
posted by:
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

    Sat, August 23, 2008 - 12:57 AM
    The exact location of where a particular body and its associated mind reside within the space-time matrix determines all - down to what you're going to think next, what you're going to say next, and down to the placement of every last hair on your head, and everyone else's for that matter.

    We have absolutely no idea of what our next thought is going to be or what's next going to come out of our mouth until, of course, after it happens, at which point we tend to make up stories like I had or didn't have control. Granted our behavior to varying degrees is patterned. Yet an existing pattern at a specific time as to whether or not one says yeah or nay to to free will or determinism is for each of our world-lines as fixed as our thumb print, and there's not even the slightest bit of wiggle-room here.

    It's an advantage to 'not believe', not a disadvantage. Beliefs grease the gears of rigidity and shut the doors of perception. 'grease the gears of rigidity' - that was funny.

    An endless array of images throwing themselves up in real-time solely for our amusement - whether we want them or not. And the commentary is included for no extra charge. You gotta admit - that's a hell of a deal.
    • I believe that we are like fluid systems.Our thinking acts as a fluid system. Chaos theory has shown that fluid systems are only predictable for short terms. The wind is also a fluid system. Just like the wind, our thinking is effected by many factors. Given only what can be known right now, possible paths will diverge into the future. We can not tell which way the wind will blow at an exact moment one month from now, and we can not tell what we will be thinking at an exact moment one month from now. They are fluid systems and are not predictable over long term. There are general patterns in fluid systems that can lead to the appearance of predictability, but the details are not determined. These details can have a significant affect on a future event. We live in a path that is most likely for who we are. In San Francisco the wind will most likely come in from the West. Still in a fluid system, the details are not determined.
    • "It's an advantage to 'not believe', not a disadvantage"

      then you explain why you get such shit everywhere you go for your opinion!

      to most people, not believing in free will means you're not as reliable, that you'll use excuses for your behavior more, and that you're also more inflexible and view yourself as more automated.

      are these opinions true?? of course not, especially in your case! are they true for SOME people? sure.

      even in a determined universe, people use excuses and try to get away with things.

      what i get almost everywhere i go when i doubt free will is that people think i am existentially hiding from responsibility and self-empowerment.

      i am trying to get at what is going on socially, not what actually is the case.

      why is free will such a sticky idea??
      • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

        Sat, August 23, 2008 - 10:03 PM
        "i am trying to get at what is going on socially, not what actually is the case."

        There's a small minority of people, certainly less than five percent, that would even consider the possibility of free will being illusive. Something I personally appreciate about this particular tribe is, whether or not free will does or does not exist, I can generally share and discuss these ideas here without (for the most part) getting too much shit about it. Though, I know for a fact that a number of people have left rather than listen to of entertain them.

        Generally, I'm much more cautious in my day to day affairs than I would be here. I'll float balloons and it seems I can fairly rapidly ascertain people's comfort levels relating to certain ideas, and I'll generally keep my communication within those limits. Doing this is really pretty easy and more comfortable for me and many of those I encounter on a daily basis. The last thing I would want is people thinking I had one too many loose screws - especially those I've developed a work-related relationship with. And there are some boxes I wouldn't open up - even with those whom I'd consider close friends. That's why they're still close friends ;-)

        You start mucking around with the delicate intricacies related the dynamics of someone else's belief system - well, you either have to be a sadist or a masochist or just very stupid. You trip the wrong switch at the wrong time in the wrong person and you can cause a meltdown - though it rarely comes to that because peoples' egos are so heavily buffered. Still, no reason to play with fire - especially when you can be pounding out a rhythm on the drums.
        • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

          Sat, August 23, 2008 - 10:18 PM
          i want to know why people won't consider the idea, and if their reticence has anything to do with the idea's genesis in the first place.
          • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

            Sat, August 23, 2008 - 10:30 PM
            Blue-j, you are on the precipice of a strange loop.

            If you start considering the possibility that the belief in free will might be genetically determined, and that even though determinism is true, it is not in the cards for most people to realize it, this could open up a rift in the space-time-reality continuum and the operators of the Matrix might decide to disconnect you.

            Don't take the red pill.
            • "Don't take the red pill."

              too late.

              i do think the commonness of the belief in free will is determined, and adaptive in some important ways. adaptive doesn't have to mean accurate always. in fact, self-deception permits better deception, and is quite apparently something that has been selected for, though it is constrained by the costs of having an inaccurate picture.
          • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

            Sat, August 23, 2008 - 10:46 PM
            Maybe one reason that most people won't even begin to consider the possibility that their actions are caused is that most people think in folk psychology. While research into the social and neurological causes of our mental phenomena and behavior have come a long way, and shown many counterintuitive results, most people don't keep up with this literature, and therefore have a conceptual framework for mental life that differs only slightly from people living in the time of Jesus.

            Most people, if you press them, are Cartesian substance dualists when it comes to the mind body problem. As a dualist, it's very easy to believe in free will - the mind isn't made of matter so of course it doesn't operate by physical law. The Christian 'soul' is just a fancied up version of the same "I can't believe it's not matter" concept of the mind.

            What I wonder is whether people who believe in free will are happier than determinists, statistically speaking. Does anyone know if a study has been done on this? I suspect the free willy brigade would be happier since people from groups that advocate free will (religious folks, social conservatives) are usually happier than people like secular liberals, who are the only people I meet who take the possibility of determinism seriously.
            • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

              Sun, August 24, 2008 - 12:00 AM
              What about the Buddhists? They have been believing in a non-dual world of dependent-related phenomena since before Jesus and into the modern day. My experience with mot folks who 'believe' in determinism is that they confuse determinism with eternalism and some notion of a power that controls destiny such as god. Mind and body, can be argued to exist as two separate entities but are still subject to the same laws of cause and effect. This is why I prefer the words dependent-related to determined.
          • I call it the 'water off the duck's back' syndrome. The idea we've been discussing is one of a variety of ideas that people would just rather not consider, and their lives are put together in ways to never even have to approach this and a number of other ideas head-on. And most of this is done unconsciously - there's no willing these actions; they just happen. Their minds are set in 'I don't even want to go there' mode. People will change the subject, change the channel, become angry, cry, become drunk or stoned, move away in proximity, tell you you're full of it (trying to make you defensive) - I could keep going on for a couple of more paragraphs, but I think you get the idea. In fact, I think you already knew.

            With most people (including myself), anytime you begin peeling off the layers of the onion, highlighting issues that point to what makes them tick, shedding light on issues that reveal aspects of a variety of different modes of their mechanicality - well, people go into self-protection, psychic self-preservation mode - a type of automated buffering that magically and instantaneously appears. In fact, it happens so fast that these events pass more rapidly than our modes of awareness. In many cases it was as though they never even happened. And then we come up with after-the-fact rationalizations as to why this something happened. They're not even sure exactly what it was, and explanations frequently bear absolutely no relation to reality.

            For many people it's more comforting *not* to speak about or consider certain things, and just the thought of seeing or analyzing certain issues causes them pain and suffering, which may or may not be imaginary. The pain and suffering *is* the buffering. And those in their immediate vicinity are drawn into this masquerade. Yet, the net effect is the same, and we're back to the duck. Another job well done.
            • >The pain and suffering *is* the buffering. <

              yes! and leads to more of the same, only deeper underground.
              • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

                Sun, August 24, 2008 - 12:13 PM
                "...more of the same, only deeper underground."

                Yes, each time a circuit is activated it becomes stronger - similar to working out a muscle. Our nervous systems and musculatures become tuned in such ways to more effortlessly exhibit certain types of responses. We call this habituation. The more easily one slides into patterns of these particular types of responses, the 'deeper underground' they recede into the nuts and bolts of the circuitry that activates our mechanical reactions to stimuli.
            • i think, as i've said, that people are guarded against being "known" and predictable. free will is a way people talk about not being predictable, being able to do unexpected things. determinism is often said to coincide with predictability.

              and you know, there are other reasons why the experience of the brain is weird. think about electricity. isn't it bizarre? it seems almost to be without form, bordering on immaterial. coincidentally, our brains are highly electrical. and so our minds may feel immaterial based on the experience of electricity. and so we are duped into thinking they are outside of causation!

              symbols also seem to persist acausally at first glance. the word "dog" is supposed to mean the same thing no matter where or when or in what situation it is used. meaning is supposed to transcend causality in a way, and so our minds, filled with simulated speech and listening and dialogue, and pictures that point to other things, and hypothetical scenarios, give the impression of transcending causation.
              • "free will is a way people talk about not being predictable..."

                I certainly agree that people find themselves maintaining a certain mystique about themselves, and societies to varying degrees keep the ball rolling with what are generally accepted as 'basic freedoms'.

                "our brains are highly electrical."

                We've boxed up classes of atomic sub-atomic, and photonic phenomena along with their underlying wave structures into classifications such as chemistry, biochemistry, biology and up the line. But, ultimately it can all be boiled down to wave motions or the interactions of very small material entities, if matter happens to be your cup of tea. We contrast these two sets of things, those beyond our scope of awareness, from which we paint pictures in our minds as to what these things really mean, and we try and relate these ongoing works of mind with those things our senses are capable of responding to. You are so right about being duped, yet we never really know how deep the duped gets.
            • the notion that people are just not too bright or unwilling to listen is reasonable - i am no liberal when it comes to false modesty about intelligence, though there are different kinds of intelligence - but that begs the question of why people are unwilling to listen or duped by a specific topic. people, for example, tend to believe that food should go in the mouth, and correctly identify what is edible. there is not much variability there. yet on the topic of free will and self, the vast majority of people -- including neuroscientists!!!! (see Blackmore (2005) -- have hard to defend notions.

              so we need a better theory on the stickiness of these "memes"!

              self is easier than free will to explain to me. first, one we started to talk, there is nothing from stopping us from representing ourselves in our own speech. and so the games begin. but also, everything that's going on inside us is too much to think about, and really we have no reason to remain aware of breathing and digestion and the like. consciousness itself is -- at least in part, voodoo! -- a reflection of a prioritization system of signals. and so self is a shorthand functional proxy for planning, social interactions, and the like.

              on to free will. it in part is an expression of our ignorance. none of us KNOWS what we are capable of doing fully. so free will is a way of talking about unknown vistas of behavioral possibilities. it's a motivation for trying. it's also a way we talk about our cognitive modeling of possibilities.
              • "...just not too bright or unwilling..."

                I wasn't referring to intelligence nor did I try to give the impression that people are unwilling. It's not so much a matter of willing or unwilling, but how we happen to be wired at a given moment in time, which of course, ceaselessly changes.

                "a reflection of a prioritization system of signals. and so self is a shorthand functional proxy for planning, social interactions, and the like."

                I like this description, yet I would add (and this is very important) that the actions of our internal prioritization systems are not under our direct control. The process of multiple loci being focused upon on an ongoing basis is a determined one, composed of infinitely complex patterns of wave interference. And it is a miracle that somewhere down the pipe, after countless levels of processing and prioritization that we're fed anything at all. From one perspective I guess you could say that any meal has to be a good one. Yet, more likely than not, we tend to complain that our meat wasn't cooked just right, or the apple wasn't quite ripe. Picky, picky.
                • <"I wasn't referring to intelligence nor did I try to give the impression that people are unwilling. It's not so much a matter of willing or unwilling, but how we happen to be wired at a given moment in time, which of course, ceaselessly changes.">

                  Yes, and depending on how I happen to be wired at the time, I might invite in a Jehova's witness for a conversation, or might tell him to fuck off and don't come back until he's seen the light of Lord Satan.

                  When you're around a group of people who don't know you well, like a party, "open up" to them about your love for Jesus and tell them why their lives could be better if they would accept our Savior. You'll see secular people act just as we've described folks reacting to determinism.

                  Determinism is just as ludicrous to these people as evangelical Christianity is to me. Whether free will is "real" or not, it is very easy to experience oneself as having free will. When you believe in free will, every experience you have verifies that belief, and to hear someone say free will doesn't exist is to hear a pedantic display of pseudointellectual posturing. And if the determinist gets the upper hand in an argument, that's not because they are right - it is because they are more skilled at arguing.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
                    "every experience you have verifies that belief"

                    The cinematic streams of our lives are a pretty clear reflection of our belief systems - what we eat, where we go, where we live, who we spend our time with, what tribes we're goofy enough to join, what we read, what we write, yada-yada.
                    • <"The cinematic streams of our lives are a pretty clear reflection of our belief systems">

                      Exactly! Most people (even scientifically and philosophically inclined people in my experience) tend to simply take their experience as given, not realizing that how we experience the world can vary wildly depending on what 'programs' our brains are running, who we talk to, what we read, and so on. Experience is surprisingly plastic and our theories can be invisible to us - they're just what "makes sense."
    • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

      Mon, September 1, 2008 - 12:56 PM

      I see both thoughts and actions are rising from an inner core
      though this inner core, it is not a point, it has no real center
      it has no form, it is not vast like space, it is not flat like a one dimension either
      it is beyond in every sense
      yet without any doubt, there is a sense of doubtless-ness, almost an absolute truth to it

      I see that thoughts and actions are rising all from this core

      an image that may go with this would be... like how the spring, out of some rocks, water is coming out, and eventually it looks like a little spring going down the hill. Though, this water I'm speaking of isn't rising out of some rock, or mountain... when I look at what it is rising from, it is something so beyond, I can only attribute doubtless-ness, absolute truth, or whatever other words the mind can make commentary about it

      the more familiar I become with this core, the more I realize it is my self, since all the expression and actions of my being from this
      so what happens, all this body, all these thoughts and their stories and history, all these astronomical forces of the matrix I inhabit... there's a lot going on... there are many winds and tides...

      there is a level of surrender, when we just give up, and we almost run on auto pilot... we allow everything to work itself out with no resistance... and to me there is where determinism shines with it's truth...

      though I am experiencing that this inner core, it's action are not dominated by the flow, winds, tides, astronomical forces, et all... it's actions are not pre-determined by the orchestration, rather, I see this core being the orchestrator, having the free-will to orchestrate or the free-will to go with the "flow"... and majority of the time, it goes by the flow, until a shift is needed

      I write all these from the depths of my meditation practices, it has personally taken a journey like that of climbing up an impossible hill to come to these realizations for myself... perhaps they may seem very ordinary, though in my experience, there has been enough evidence through my own experiences that what I have written has become self-evident as describing the sun as bright while staring at it for me... I do not feel I even have the ability to deny the truth of what I have written, even knowing that it greatly can differ from the view points, perspectives, opinions, realization, or whatnot of others.

      I experience these truths as being universal, though, personally, my own persona I like to stay as the observer, as the guy who is open to learning new things constantly, open to experiences beyond any of my own confines... though also doubtless, I am within my own persona of confines too. I have managed to puncture a few holes, and feel filled with gratefulness for the experiences and visions that seem to bring an almost constant state of change and evolution to my personal being.... that is my personal evolution, though to this inner core which I have written, it is always the same. In my personal experience it is universally without any limitations to time, space, dimensions always the same, it's nature seems changeless, though it's expression seems infinitely always in change.
  • >the person who claims "i have no free will" is signaling predictability in some ways, and thereby ostensibly stating that their behavior is deeply patterned.<

    i think the statement "i have free will" signals more patterning than one who doesn't make that claim, in the sense that to know is to stop actively perceiving signals that contradict a belief.
    • “free will developed as a decoy signal about predictability.” - bl

      This sounds like the birth of an ability to lie as a survival tool, to fool one’s rival or enemy, a prey’s imagination taking it to a new level where the tables are turned and masking predictable habits as a lure in its own right to foil the predators own predictable habits, tried and true tactics, perhaps even entirely over-turning the hunter/hunted dynamic. Free will as the ultimate in elements of surprise, no one no longer needs to just lie in wait, or rely upon the force of superior speed and strength to win the day. Actually I think that free will developed as an arm’s race about competition, not necessarily as survival of the smartest, trickiest, most clever, or most imaginative, but just more weapons and tools to employ in the seemingly never-ending battle for sustainable genesis. Evolution develops as a result of luck, both kinds (the given and the kind that is made). Saying that free will developed as a signal of any type about anything may explain why, but doesn’t explain how. Free will, if real, if successful, seems to be highly adaptive and especially useful about a variety of tasks. If free will is somehow akin to imagination, possibly a result of it, this ability to predict actions of others, events of nature, and also used to not only change one’s own predictive behavior, but to mask it, disguise it. Perhaps in part this is why Albert was fond of saying that imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge comes from within and from without, with conscious awareness and without, often through trial and error. Imagination is not dependent on the other and is only shared as new born knowledge when it is a gift or revealed by use.




      • Glen, you bring up some interesting points.

        “…masking predictable habits as a lure…”

        On the surface it might appear that there is somebody doing something, calling the shots, acting as the ultimate decision maker, but I have no reason to believe this is true, nor has anyone led me to believe otherwise. In that decisive moment – the decision plays itself out; it isn’t intentionally played even if one has a sense that that is the case. The pressures of the moment provide the inputs that determine the actions, of course, with the influences of our individual static and dynamic memories coloring our perceptions and consequent actions. What we consider the concept of surprise is the mechanical transference of energy in our brains from one sector to another, and this process transpires whether or not we are aware of it. Actually, any so-called awareness of the process influences it, not because of an illusive greater degree of control, but that the process of awareness just by the nature of being a process taps energy from the workings of other parts of the engine. In those decisive life and death moments you’ll be better off having no presence of awareness, better to have your personalized chariot do its thing; this way you might live to tell about it.

        So, what does this mean? It means though we may have the luxury of believing we can be aware, that when the chips are down you better just hope that whatever you think of as you and free will and all that gets totally obliterated, that some part of you lurking in the background pulls the curtain on the side-show and takes care of business. If survival has anything whatsoever to do with the evolutionary process, than *this* ‘getting out of the way’ is what has been selected for.

        And yet we skip down the street, smiles on our faces, twiddling our thumbs, thoughts of free will rippling across our minds. It may be that these thoughts must be produced to act as a security blanket to hide the inevitability that our minds, at a moment’s notice, can, are and will be torn from us.
        • The (thou?) emerges from that self interaction.
          "Consciousness is those that are harmonized and resonant with the center. One and Itself in the fractal pattern of the whole and all of its possibilities and modes within the greater. (Older?)"

          we are limited fragments of the whole and complete of the One- projected into each other and into the each of us.

          The 'is' word pretends to be present, while it attempts to stay current, at best consciousness emerged from that self interaction, consciousness was those that were harmonized and disharmonized, resonated and perhaps disturbed.
          What was a loop, may just be time-lag, acts of awareness are acts that witness, even an event is predicted, it remains to see that event unfold, this kind of excessive witnessing becomes eventually accepted as a given, no longer worthy of attention or concern, it runs in the background, one more event that becomes delegated to the scrapheap of the understood, it joins in the realm of the unconscious, it’s utilitarian uses opening resources for poorly understood events.


        • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

          Mon, September 1, 2008 - 1:21 PM
          Charles,

          How is it that it seems we are saying the same thing sometimes, though we also seem to be on the opposite sides on this? haha

          perhaps determinism is when the ego/identity/mind realizes it don't know anything, and starts to become conscious of the "flow" and goes with it. this realization which changed my life from that moment occurred in Nov of 2003 after experiencing, feeling, hearing, seeing the entire universe within my physical body, it kept expanding into this massive vision of what seemed like countless galaxies, until all of existence appeared to be a fruit of non-existence. I'm trying to describe something which I don't think I can describe in words... so that's just a small probably fruitless effort here. That state lasted for almost 3 months nearly constantly. I would be walking to check the mailbox as I kept experiencing this within my body, I had no sense of having muscles, blood, stomach, heart etc. It was that kind of intense experience. Though in different parts of my body there were different sensations, for example in the stomach area I felt a constant infinitely emptying emptiness.

          following that experience, right from the first 60 seconds of that experience, I lost sense of "I" from my mind, I could no longer relate with any impressions I had... and my life began a journey of constant change... I had no idea if I would be making love to someone, killing someone, walking in front of a car, flying in the air, or answering the phone the next moment. It had such an intense impact on my psychology that even today, almost 5 years later, I feel my psychology is still trying to reach some state of "balance" in my persona so that I could relate, relate with anything... as I feel there is nothing to relate with. So gradually I began to rebuild the psychological structure, began creating a new sense of self/identity that could function in unison with this inner experience which hasn't left me, though the drama/explosiveness of it has subsided and it has become almost ordinary at this point.

          more and more now, I am familiar that it is this inner core that is guiding everything, and it is beyond causality... because of it's nature beyond causality, I describe it as beyond determinism, as its actions/inner-guidance are not from the causality of time, space, matter, thought... rather all these are just mere expressions of it... and these expressions mingling and flowing together, creating tides, waves, whirlwinds, little lakes, mountain hills, bodies of gasses, all eventually just lead to the expression of this self-knowledge, that being the beginning of its expression within its own matrix... and here is where free-will begins, but the free-will is of that inner core... and, in my experience, the only self is that inner core, that is the only actor ultimately... though not everything is aware of this, not everyone is... and perhaps it's not even meant to be that way... we each have our own "pre-determined" self-expression as our outer expression (mind/body) where created within the confines of time/space/matter etc. Though, ultimately, I do see this inner core has the freedom to will from a space beyond causality... and this freedom is what I call free-will, it is quiet far from the free-will from an ordinary sense maybe. perhaps I should use a different phrase?


          • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

            Wed, September 3, 2008 - 11:20 PM
            Again, as I've said in past conversations with you, these 'states', which you continue to idolize, were merely energy dancing across the keyboard of your mind. I know you hold these past songs of yours as being important, but the experiences of these riffs having been played through your mind are akin to a river having flowed along its course; and like the river, you had and have no choice. To identify and repeatedly echo these songs, which of course, you have as little control over now as when you first experienced them, merely causes the diamond stylus to cut ever deeper into the soft groove of your mind, moving your point of reference further and further from what you yourself might term free will, even if such an illusive construct could exist.

            Each time you refer back and fall into this repetitive process and speak about the blinding energy of other worlds and galaxies - the deeper you trap yourself within the illusion, and the less of an opportunity you will have to experience the magic of the moment dwelling right before you - like right now. What you seem to be doing is reinforcing a tissue-paper maze and slowly transforming it into what might as well be reinforced concrete. And there does come a point when the cement sets. This is what is called crystallization, when one's life energy no longer has the strength to counter beliefs which for all practical purposes have become permanently fixed during one's lifetime. But, then again, maybe this as well was what was meant to be.
  • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

    Tue, September 2, 2008 - 10:15 AM
    What others call free will, I call wisdom. Knowing that there are no things or phenomena in this universe that can be found to exist independent of any other thing or phenomena we can say that all things and phenomena are determined by this relationship. This is the ultimate nature of the universe, that without the mind that sees, no thing or phenomena can be said to exist at all, only space like emptiness. So this free will is an exercise in seeing clearly that only we can control our own mind, thoughts, and conceptions. This is the ultimate freedom. This is wisdom. The disadvantage of not seeing this clearly is that we move from thing to thing, person to person, event to event, sometimes happy, sometimes suffering, and never in control, merely reacting to our desires in search of happiness and meaning. So, the disadvantage is a lifetime spent in so called samsara, and the advantage is called liberation.
  • Re: the disadvantage of not believing in free will

    Mon, October 13, 2008 - 2:36 PM
    There are those who think that life
    Has nothing left to chance
    With a host of holy horrors
    To direct our aimless dance

    A planet of playthings
    We dance on the strings
    Of powers we cannot perceive
    "the stars aren't aligned ---
    Or the gods are malign"
    Blame is better to give than receive

    You can choose a ready guide
    In some celestial voice
    If you choose not to decide
    You still have made a choice

    You can choose from phantom fears
    And kindness that can kill
    I will choose a path that's clear
    I will choose free will

    There are those who think that they've been dealt a losing hand
    The cards were stacked against them ---
    They weren't born in lotus-land

    All preordained
    A prisoner in chains
    A victim of venomous fate
    Kicked in the face
    You can't pray for a place
    In heaven's unearthly estate

    Each of us
    A cell of awareness
    Imperfect and incomplete
    Genetic blends
    With uncertain ends
    On a fortune hunt
    That's far too fleet...

Recent topics in "Willful Ignorance"