Clyde G. is a respected thinker and Neo-Buddhist who has been acknowledged for his ability to ask questions going to the heart of issues regarding metaphysical models of reality.
Dan;
OK, acknowledging that we have not addressed the issue of how desirability of consequences is defined and your qualifier regarding our ability to know, we are mostly in agreement. That leaves this:
Cg: How would your suggestion that “one is responsible for the actions one does not take”, given the above conclusion, effect your decision making? To me (you may feel differently) it seems that such a consideration might cause me permanent indecision or, more likely, to ignore that suggestion and choose.
Djs: I would disagree with this point. We make decisions every day, every hour, every minute, every second regarding what actions we will or will not take. This scenario does not cause us to enter into a state of ‘permanent indecision’ although it does cause us to pause from time to time.
Yes, people make decisions every day, but that may be because people do not believe that “one is responsible for the actions one does not take”.
Djs: I am not suggesting we are capable of knowing ALL potential actions, rather I am speaking of potential actions of which we are aware.
Oh, of course, not literally ALL, but reasonably aware. Yes?
But even when considering only the consequences of the “potential actions of which we are aware”, those consequences will depend on the actions taken by everyone, excluding you, at that moment of your act and ALL the actions taken by everyone, including you, thereafter eternally.
And remember, the point of my original e-mail to you was that I had found something that corresponded to “your search for something personal that was born and would live eternally” and that was “our action; that was born because it came into existence with our doing, and would live eternally because the consequences are endless”.
clyde