Does that make it art? — T Clark
terms "displacing projections/imposition" you refer to the way language "displaces" non linguistic intuitions — Constance
Colon Conners speak about Henry: we have turned away from life, — Constance
The epoche asks the philosopher to suspend the most common thinking that we naturally settle into in daily living, and reduce the world to its pure phenomena. This term "pure" is of course at issue here. can one actually have a "pure" perceptual encounter with the world such that what is there is received perceptually as it is. The analytics would add to this "as it is independently of the contribution of the perceiver, and this obviously creates a problem in epistemology, for S know P is nonsense if there is no essential "knowing" — Constance
A bit windy on that. Sorry. — Constance
one has to be rational to know since knowing is the affirmation, the denial, the conditional, the conjunction and so on. — Constance
THIS is what possesses one such that one cannot understand the "truth" as you have been describing it. One is busy, entangled and fascinated IN the totality. — Constance
nothing physicalist in any of this. — Constance
Seems like entirely different subject matter. — Vera Mont
Elon Musk seems to have sublimated most of his anxiety and worries better than anyone else. — Shawn
Sorry, I didn't get much beyond the OP question. It didn't seem relevant. — Vera Mont
Artists like Tom Waits or Leonard Cohen would never make it because they would be too interesting and unorthodox. — Tom Storm
I understand the OP question — 180 Proof
Michel Henry — Astrophel
But few are willing to see that religion essentially IS the world because the world is indeterminate and it is in the ethical indeterminacy of the world, or our being-in-the-world, that insists on meta-redemption and meta-consummation. — Astrophel
Redemption is about being "thrown" into a world of suffering, the negative dimension of ethics; and consummation refers to the positive completion found in the incompleteness of desire. — Astrophel
you might find the brief discussion about Michel Henry very interesting — Astrophel
It took our perspective away from our living reality and gave us an objectification of the self — Astrophel
forgotten, as Kierkegaard put it, that we exist. — Astrophel
this kind of "truth" can be said to be about qualia, the phenomenologically pure color or sound, say. — Astrophel
Yes because "qualia" if that "experience" of direct sensation, is before meaning has been constructed and projected.qualia really doen't carry meaning. — Astrophel
A sprained wrist is worse than, — Astrophel
It's just that I think it's important to note that this framework is always already there, even when one is questioning it's limits. It is IN the questioning. — Astrophel
This would be a very different kind of truth that has to be set apart from propositional truth — Astrophel
PROVIDING you have had the same kind of experience — Astrophel
We understand the world through language. — Astrophel
superimposed knowledge" would be dogmatism, which is accepting without justification. — Astrophel
we can infer that there is Will based on our own subjective aspect — schopenhauer1
:fire: — 180 Proof
e.g. the difference between being free and not being free — 180 Proof
Adam and Eve" were slaves punished with mortality by The Master for learning that they do not have to be slaves by learning to disobey (i.e. how to free themselves). :fire: — 180 Proof
After all, the Abrahamic tradition begins with a woman disobeying "the Lord" who forbade her from eating fruit from a "Tree of Knowledge" (truth): Hebrew (JCI) scriptures depict "the original sin" as a woman thinking for herself by "seeking truth".
. And, not only not where you will find the "essence of religion, but precisely where we lost both the essence of religion, that is, living and our freedom in the process.the imposition thinking — Constance
it needs a lot more. — Astrophel
truth needs to be understood very differently from what is generally understood in philosophy and its often steely devotion to logic. — Astrophel
When one "authentically practices" religion, have they, as you suggest, become nothing less than meditating Buddhists? If so, then this needs to be further understood — Astrophel
If so, then why are religions not founded on public impersonal objective truths and are not daily practices (celebrations) of rigorous public error-correction? — 180 Proof
I would agree with Nietzsche (here, but in few other places) that a great deal of what we fuss over issues from errors conceived out of the imposition thinking has itself created. — Constance
That is more like the Sōtō Zen attitude of ‘ordinary mind’. — Wayfarer
If enlightenment is possible, then it must be experienced directly — Janus
yet I think the idea of the radically transcendent is of great import and meaning in human life, precisely as "the great indeterminable" — Janus
If enlightenment is possible, then it must be experienced directly and could mean nothing to those who have not experienced it — Janus
I'm saying the things in themselves are thought as real, but of course that for us they are noumenal, that is they are not real but merely thought. — Janus
I think it would apply to all noumena, that, if they are real, they are not merely thought, even though they may not be able to be anything but thought for us. — Janus
Of course I hope you read what I said under the caveat "for Schopenhauer". I was basically asserting it to be a logical concomitant — Janus
not the (unknowable, unthinkable) real things in themselves as such — Janus
then being must be equated/ confated with Will. — Janus
If there was no free will, our bodies would run off like criminals and try to take us for a ride. — Barkon
Yet surely leaves are an "innate property of oaks," no? — Count Timothy von Icarus
Here's a place where we can see that what seems innate is just what fits the pre-fab construction. Babies may show they are aware-ing their natural environment. A smile triggers a smile naturally. That response is innate. There is no understanding using concept/idea. There is no idea. But as for once babies start understanding idea, my guess would be they have already assimilated very basic constructions. That is understanding.we might say that even babies show they understand some seemingly "innate" ideas. — Count Timothy von Icarus
If the type of enviornment that allows a human being to survive (or perhaps "develop normally") is of the type that it always produces certain ideas, then it would seem fair to call those ideas innate. — Count Timothy von Icarus
read the paragraphs beginning here. — Wayfarer
That object which was initially unknown became “apple”, hence to say that object is unknowable, is a contradiction. The thing-in-itself, on the other hand, never becomes anything at all, so can be said to be, and remain, unknowable. — Mww
The thing-in-itself is not mediated, — Mww
Yesbecause logic cannot be independent of our constructions, — Mww
Yes, understood.This seems to mistreat appearance as “what it looks like” when it should be “when it makes its presence felt”. — Mww
key to the 'noumena' issue is Kant's criticism of the rationalists including Liebniz and Descartes, both of whom believed the existence of God could be proven by rational principles. — Wayfarer
Viewed in that light, and resisting the urge to 'peek behind', I think it's quite a reasonable idea. — Wayfarer
If noumena are mediated reality, why do we have phenomena? — Mww
Really real in Kant is the affect of things on our senses. — Mww
I could be wrong but, I don’t think Schop makes the distinction between Thing in Itself and noumenal. For schop Will is Thing itself is Noumena… — schopenhauer1