Probabilities makes the existence of free will possible

[inavalan]

So how can the well-meaning idealist know whether or not his good intent will lead to some actualization? How can he know, or how can she know, whether or not this good intent might in fact lead to disastrous conditions? When does the idealist turn into a fanatic?

Look at it this way: If someone tells you that pleasure is wrong and tolerance is weakness, and that you must follow this or that dogma blindly in obedience, and if you are told this is the only right road toward the idealized good, then most likely you are dealing with a fanatic. If you are told to kill for the sake of peace, you are dealing with someone who does not understand peace or justice. II you are told to give up your free will, you are dealing with a fanatic.

Both men and molecules dwell in a field of probabilities, and their paths are not determined. The vast reality of probabilities makes the existence of free will possible. If probabilities did not exist, and if you were not to some degree aware of probable actions and events, not only could you not choose between them, but you would not of course have any feelings of choice (intently). You would be unaware of the entire issue.

(9:03.) Through your mundane conscious choices, you affect all of the events of your world, so that the mass world is the result of multitudinous individual choices. You could not make choices at all if you did not feel impulses to do this or that, so that choices usually involve you in making decisions between various impulses.

Impulses are urges toward action. Some are conscious and some are not. Each cell of your body feels (underlined) the impulse toward action, response, and communication. You have been taught not to trust your impulses. Now impulses, however, help you to develop events of natural power. Impulses in children teach them to develop their muscles and minds [each] in their own unique manner. And as you will see, those impulses of a private nature are nevertheless also based upon the greater situation of the species and the planet, so that "ideally" the fulfillment of the individual would automatically lead to the better good of the species.

--- NoME #856

[Deb]

The message is always the same, listen to your inner self. Fanaticism in any form is trouble.

But then, what about the fanatic? Is their inner self steering them? My thought is no, that the fanatic is operating purely from the level of ego. Their "impulses" are not coming from the inner self, but from the self-serving ego that in some cases will stop at nothing in order to satisfy itself and then rationalize their actions. I wonder how fanaticism can be mitigated. Some real soul searching would be involved.