nOT-sO-fREE-wILL*

Having written myself into a teleological wasteland, a Bradley(lian) corner, I must seek out an erasure, an epistemic wipecloth. If I could but close my eyes and rethink the process, all would be well, but as I can’t (Kant) I have no other recourse than to Oedipal-eyes. I asked today what the difference is between something that is given to us by God and something that is inherent, or not given to us by God. Are they the same thing, a twinning, two sides of the same coin? If we are given free-will by God, then can we know who the giver is? If we can, then aren’t we giving back what the giver gave us, the ability to exercise our will freely? It seems to me that give and inherent are the same thing, identical twins with identical nominal value, a given give giver. All things, then, are given and therefore not inherent, unless inherent means to be given, which I doubt it does. If God is the giver of all things, free-will, intellect, will and the capacity to exercise said gifts, the given gives, then are we really given anything at all, or is the given really the give, the God who gives give to the given? I am giving myself a splitting headache, a give given by me the giver, given my capacity, or gift, to exercise my free-will, which is given freely, but never given back to the giver, the give given giver given. Now the words give, given and giver have lost all meaning for me, they are as senseless as the free-will I have been given, yet can never give back to the giver, or for that matter, know who the giver is, because if I knew who the giver was, or is, I would be the giver, identical to the give given giver give. I hate metaphysics and the fact that I am so darn crappy at it. I best stay with counting and recounting, tabulating and re-tabulating, correlating and re-correlating, as they are things, actions of my not-so-free-will, that I seem to have some control over, albeit a puerile and vacuous one, a not-yet-given given control of.