Will to will

Month, Day: 166, Will, Will (Justice)

Several topics could be apropos to the theme, yet one arises naturally.

We know that people have Will, namely through observing volition in ourselves and others. Of course, we can know this through Revelation, too.

What influence does one's will have on others? That is, we know there are differences between individuals, by design, that exhibit themselves various ways. Stronger wills impose their views on those of the lessor. In that very large middle, we might have more egalité than not.

Some think that the give and take within the playing out of a program's unfolding requires resolution of conflicts that are will enabled. That is, a big question about performance, and its expectation, concerns what is possible. For instance, 'cannot do' does not mean 'will not do' in many cases. Yet, many times an inexperienced view, willing to try, is allowed to create a mess. But, we do, or can, learn thereby.

The modern view loses itself in the confounding that is inevitable. Why? For one, the computer has turned things around thereby placing many modern situations in more of a stack-of-cards condition than is realized.

Trying to resolve how to theoretically describe some aspects of these things led to game theory which can be applied in many situations. Yet, there is more than that esteemed field covers.

Perhaps, themes related to audacity are necessary. Similar to there being in situ variations, people interactions are as varied and, perhaps, even more so. Too, part of the 'in situ' property would be who's there, that is, local influences upon some type of medium.

Ah, one might say, that's been thrown out. Or, such considerations are beyond the purview of ourselves here on this side of Creation.

But, wait, such dynamics may be very much analogous to that behind thermodynamics and could very well be amenable to our understanding or, at least, to our utilitarian interests.

Do we know a priori?