هل الارادة قوة قائمة بذاتها .. العوامل النفسية .. حقيقة الإرادة .. كتاب علم النَّفس

Is will a force on its own? Psychological factors. The reality of will

4 - Is will a power that exists in itself: the voluntarist doctrine. - Most school psychologists did not accept these solutions, because they believed that the rational and emotional elements were not sufficient to form the will. They said: The will is separate from these elements, and that it is a force independent of the other forces of the soul, and that it is a simple essence that acts in its entirety without its action being able to be increased. Descartes claimed that the will of man, like the will of God, has no limits and no end (Book of Meditations - Section Four). What also prompted them to do this: What they found in: voluntary action of the stages: such as goal conception, discussion, determination, and implementation. They showed, first, that goal conception and discussion are two mental processes that prepare for voluntary action, but do not establish it. Secondly, they claimed that determination is something independent of discussion, and that it It is due to will alone. The will, then, is a force capable of determination, that is, of making decisions without any restrictions or conditions. It is free from the influence of motives and motives. Rather, it is an absolute beginning and a first cause.

Perhaps William James is the psychologist most inclined to consider the will as a stand-alone force (Sui generis). For him, the origin of will goes back to the conceptual and motor act. This action appears to us at first glance to be different from a voluntary action, but if we delve deeper into the analysis, it becomes clear to us that the difference between these two actions is not great. The movement follows the perception directly in the motor conceptual act, but in the voluntary act it does not begin until after discussion, as the new conception encounters on its way many loyal or opposing conceptions, and it agrees with them or resists them, and the soul hesitates between the different sides, and in reality it does not It hesitates only because there is a conflict between perceptions, and these perceptions continue to harmonize and conflict. Some of them triumph over the other, and overcoming them strains attention. This determined voluntary effort is what says to the thing, “Be,” and it is (Fiat volonlaire); This ensures that the driving perception prevails over other opposing perceptions. It is different from muscular effort. Rather, it is a unique force that pushes the weak perception to overcome the strong perception. William James said: The will directs attention to difficult perceptions, and brings these perceptions together in the center of feeling, and all of this requires effort and attention. This effort only exists where a person aspires with his sight to lofty things that raise him above the depths of habit and instinct, elevate him to the height of insight, and make him feel with it that he is able to go against desires, struggle against passion, and walk the path of intense resistance.

Discussion .
- There is no doubt that these theories provide clarification of some of the characteristics of voluntary effort, and there is no doubt that the will is not decomposed into individual, simple parts. Just as the flow of a river does not decompose into the elements that make up the water, so voluntary effort does not decompose into the mental motives and emotional motives that enter into its composition. But saying that will is a power that exists on its own is nothing but a purely verbal solution to a difficult and complex issue. Will is not a simple psychological activity, nor a fixed, unchanging force. Rather, it is in fact a set of actions that include many elements, and these elements, by their similarity, generate a general, abstract concept, called will. (Apingus, Psychology Book, p. 117).

Perhaps the biggest mistake made by the scholastic theorists was due to their belief that this concept had a real, true existence. This belief led them - as I saw - to divide voluntary action into different successive parts, so they severed all connection between determination and discussion, and made the will a controlling force, and determination a miracle, not science. We have the reasons! This theory, as we will explain in the chapter on freedom, has a great moral danger, and it also contains a hideous scientific error, because it strips voluntary determination from motives and motivations, and separates discussion from the conception of the goal, and the conception of the goal from the determination, even though the truth is otherwise, because the discussion begins with the conception of the goal. The goal, the goal is inherent in the determination, and the determination is connected to the work. It is then ignorant to separate determination from motives and motives, and discussion from implementation. We will see in the fourth chapter that the meaning of freedom contained in this theory contradicts the postulates of science.

As for William James, he was correct in analyzing the voluntary action and likening it to a conceptual and motor action, but he was wrong in attributing the will to the determined effort, and in counting it, determination is a controlling force that tells the thing “Be” and it is, without it being dependent on other factors. He said (Al-Fardinah). The biggest mistake William James made was his saying: The will is a controlling, ruling force that says to a thing, “Be,” and it is, and that it intervenes in the occurrence of things, like the God of the Torah who says, “Let there be light,” and there is light. We do not understand how the influence of the will leads to following the path of intense resistance, and from where the will derives this strange magic that makes the weak worker overcome the strong worker. What they mentioned in this regard are only controls, or upon investigation, it is darkness upon darkness.