 |
Duration: 04:38 minutes Upload Time: 2007-12-17 19:04:06 User: pyrrho314 :::: Favorites :::: Top Videos of Day |
|
Description: an explanation of my youtube profile slogan This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License |
|
Comments | |
| battim ::: Favorites 2007-12-20 02:01:20 chemicals make sure of that we can't see the "moodlessly"...i'm still not sure the simply because we have evolved to "perceive" that makes it "real" or separate. if nothing the else the input into our nervous system is intrinsically part of the process. our ability to compartmentalize is compartmentalized in it and of itself, like most matter. you make me thinks. thanks. __________________________________________________ | |
| pyrrho314 ::: Favorites 2007-12-19 15:24:32 agreed shanella __________________________________________________ | |
| pyrrho314 ::: Favorites 2007-12-19 15:24:11 Our perceptions of our OWN BODY, i.e. those neurons, we will find some that are distinct from their surrounding, and some that we are not sure about... is it us, or the neuron. E.g. the color... is that us, or the thing itself? If its both how can we separate them? All these questions are well sorted I think, in principle, but not practice. I mean, we know our mood is part of how things seem, but we still can't get out of it and see things "moodlessly". __________________________________________________ | |
| pyrrho314 ::: Favorites 2007-12-19 15:23:20 if you correct that with a group for "half black half red" some other pebble will fall through the cracks unless you break the categories down such that there is one pebble per category. To address this we either shove pebbles into categories they don't belong, have a special "enigma" category, or ignore them. ... __________________________________________________ | |
| pyrrho314 ::: Favorites 2007-12-19 15:19:36 I think it works like this battim, all we do is sort perceptions... say the perceptions were pebbles from a riverbank, we could sort those things into distinct groups, black stones, red stones, shiny stones, clear stones, and so on, and these will be distinct groups but we will have some stones that don't have a clear group to go in becuase they are half red, half black for example... __________________________________________________ | |
| Shanella28 ::: Favorites 2007-12-19 07:46:30 I agree to disagree with you, respectfully. __________________________________________________ | |
| vegrin ::: Favorites 2007-12-19 05:39:27 Now dont get me wrong... I am no dualist like Decartes. In theory since "you" are the sum total of your brain and your body, "you" are also your environment and everything influencing you to be who you are. There are no clear defined borders between you and the world around you. I kinda think of our conscious thoughts as small lights on the top of tall mountains. __________________________________________________ | |
| battim ::: Favorites 2007-12-19 04:48:59 interesting vlog...i guess what i question is can you separate "you" from everything or anything else? and if you can't (entropy precludes that) than it leaves it fuzzy. are a complex set of nerve synapses firing systemically separate from the world around it? hmmmm...my brain hurts. __________________________________________________ | |
| pyrrho314 ::: Favorites 2007-12-18 23:18:54 in general, fine, but on the issue of "I think therefore I am" the arguments can be compared and Descartes is inferior, less insightful. granted, just my opinion. __________________________________________________ | |
| Shanella28 ::: Favorites 2007-12-18 21:47:07 Descartes' claim that we are essentially thinking substance he saw imperfections, ideas and thought which will lack clarity. Nietzsches claims that such flaws or misperformances define what we are. __________________________________________________ | |
| Shanella28 ::: Favorites 2007-12-18 20:47:20 Nietzsches and Descartes are like two opposite side of a pole. The qualities of their argument is only good as the foundations they are based upon. __________________________________________________ | |
| pyrrho314 ::: Favorites 2007-12-18 15:24:29 Within the system Descartes claimed to apply, he made an error. Within the system it seems and acts absolute... it's not universally absolute only because the frame of logic and doubt that Descartes applies is itself limited and not aboslute. similarly: 2=2 is 100% true within mathematics, but it is not an absolute truth because the definitions of "=" and "2" are not absolutes. __________________________________________________ | |
| pyrrho314 ::: Favorites 2007-12-18 15:24:14 there do not have to be, he showed Descartes formulation flawed in its own terms of logic, language, and the purity of the doubt Descartes claimed. __________________________________________________ | |
| pyrrho314 ::: Favorites 2007-12-18 15:21:48 fundamental to my philosophy, and to modern philosophy of cognition as well, denies mind/body dualism. The mind is a body, it's a brain, the two terms discuss different aspects and perspectives on the same thing. if you mean "conscious thought"... yes, that is a subset of all thought. It's not a very absolute distinction as I can bring most unconscious things into or out of consciousness. __________________________________________________ | |
| pyrrho314 ::: Favorites 2007-12-18 15:19:58 vegrin: ah, the unconscious... to me that's all ME and part of the mind, I count those thoughts as thoughts... the ego is like a body in the mind, we get perceptions of those though it's subtle, but we obviously do get some perceptions of them because here we are discussing those perceptions of the unconscious. Indeed, we get a lot of perceptions from the unconscious and presume more are stored there (and ready to be discovered imo). __________________________________________________ | |
No comments:
Post a Comment