Interesting thanks . Reminded me of worldwide myths regarding shaman and smith (brothers/twins) and also loosely of the old humors (melancholic , sanguine, phlegmatic , and choleric) and how those might relate to the archetypes you mention - as for free will - I don’t believe in it any more although like you I am open to the idea of some room somewhere on that but nature v nurture - I agree nature or predestiny does affect who we are / not just environment ,.,
I like your input. It shows that these predisposed characteristic patterns have been recognized across time and place.
The motif of the shaman and the smith is one clear example. In each case the two figures represent complementary forms of transformation or the directions an individual may gravitate toward: one spiritual and ecstatic, the other material and technical. Both work with forces that set them apart, much like the Lullu and the En.
The classical four humors offer another useful lens for considering these recurring human dispositions. On your statement of free will, I share your openness to complexity. Nature and predisposition clearly shape us, yet the capacity for self-observation remains part of the human situation, and I am pointing to this as the potential game changer.
"Consciousness as the passenger, the deeper posture as the driver" is a genuine complication worth sitting with rather than smoothing over. My own language leans toward will as discovered through attention, implying real freedom in the discovering.
Thank you for your thoughtful response. You pointed out exactly the meaning I was aiming for. Attention as agency can be cultivated to the point where those drivers [our base nature / subconscious mind] no longer operate completely unseen. The moment a pattern is clearly seen as a pattern, its power begins to change. Seeing them clearly is already a form of freedom: not in the sense of the absence of predisposition, but in the sense of no longer being owned by it.
In a fuller sense, the blank-page view is right that we are not sealed at birth. The older view is right that we do not begin as pure possibility. Attention is the living place where those two truths meet without being at odds with each other, and where we can become the best version of our selves.
Interesting thanks . Reminded me of worldwide myths regarding shaman and smith (brothers/twins) and also loosely of the old humors (melancholic , sanguine, phlegmatic , and choleric) and how those might relate to the archetypes you mention - as for free will - I don’t believe in it any more although like you I am open to the idea of some room somewhere on that but nature v nurture - I agree nature or predestiny does affect who we are / not just environment ,.,
I like your input. It shows that these predisposed characteristic patterns have been recognized across time and place.
The motif of the shaman and the smith is one clear example. In each case the two figures represent complementary forms of transformation or the directions an individual may gravitate toward: one spiritual and ecstatic, the other material and technical. Both work with forces that set them apart, much like the Lullu and the En.
The classical four humors offer another useful lens for considering these recurring human dispositions. On your statement of free will, I share your openness to complexity. Nature and predisposition clearly shape us, yet the capacity for self-observation remains part of the human situation, and I am pointing to this as the potential game changer.
"Consciousness as the passenger, the deeper posture as the driver" is a genuine complication worth sitting with rather than smoothing over. My own language leans toward will as discovered through attention, implying real freedom in the discovering.
Thank you for your thoughtful response. You pointed out exactly the meaning I was aiming for. Attention as agency can be cultivated to the point where those drivers [our base nature / subconscious mind] no longer operate completely unseen. The moment a pattern is clearly seen as a pattern, its power begins to change. Seeing them clearly is already a form of freedom: not in the sense of the absence of predisposition, but in the sense of no longer being owned by it.
In a fuller sense, the blank-page view is right that we are not sealed at birth. The older view is right that we do not begin as pure possibility. Attention is the living place where those two truths meet without being at odds with each other, and where we can become the best version of our selves.