Poll: Your Preferred View of Se (Will)

[tcaudilllg]

Admin: delete the other two, please.

You are witness to several groups of people who seem to be cooperating toward a common goal. Despite the signs of cooperation, there seems to be some level of acrimony between two of the groups. The third group has sided with one of the two, putting the remaining group at a disadvantage. Unsure how to resist the combined pressure of its peers, the opposition group relents and obeys its rival despite its disagreements with them.

Are these three groups together...

- A set of several distinct groups, each representing a single will

- a set of distinct wills which are wholly independent from each other

- a group of independent wills that are acting as a single will, irregardless of the opposition's disagreements with its direction

[Exodus]

Uh, what's the difference?

[aestrivex]

i don't understand the question.

[tcaudilllg]

Vote for the one that you feel more inclined to perceive. Like, what's your first reaction. Don't think about it before you answer. (it's a rapid response test.)

[aestrivex]

Vote for the one that you feel more inclined to perceive. Like, what's your first reaction. Don't think about it before you answer. (it's a rapid response test.)

i have absolutely no gut reaction when i look at those choices because i don't understand the question.

[Mediator Kam]

I like the idea of "a set of distinct wills which are wholly independent from each other", even during cooperative behavior. That was my gut reaction.

[strrrng]

I wish I had read your post before answering. since you mentioned the siding between two of the groups and the aquiescence by the third, that would have influenced it. based on the general description, 3 groups that merge to a single goal are independent wills acting as one, because of everyone's differing perceptions, but being focused on the same thing. However, based on the example, I would say a set of several distinct groups, each representing a single will. this is because they each have motives, which is why the first two sided together - that was their will coming forth. then, the third, feeling weak, chose the smartest decision, as a group, and sided with the two. that was representative of their will as a whole. now the three are together, still with different wills, because they didn't come together out of pure agreement.

But I have no clue what you are getting at....I just found the question stimulating.