Fun idea.

What is…

Being — Mikie

Good question.

Awareness

I presume it's the same for most humans in this respect: the focus of our consciousness -- not in a collective sense, but rather I think most humans have an individual focus on their consciousness, whereas you can still feel a pain even if you're not focused on it.

Consciousness

The phenomenal "feeliness" of the world. The taste of pizza isn't just salty-spicy-sweet, but the particular combination of your bodily make-up and its bodily make-up in conjunction -- if you want a cognitive answer -- or what it tastes like, if you don't.

Thinking

I'm not sure.

Time

Not sure.

Sensation

I think this one can't have an answer. The other topics are more general than "sensation".

Perception

Discrimination.

Mind

Body

Good

All uncertain for me.

Happiness

Justice

Interlinked. Happiness is ataraxia, and ataraxia is only achievable by living in a just society.

Truth

...is embedded in language.

Being
Many would say the cardinal attribute of whatever can be said to exist, but as I have argued in many a thread, 'being' carries the connotation of sentient existence, i.e. existence as a being (e.g. 'human being'). Accordingly I hold that 'being' 'existence' and 'reality' are not strictly synonymous.
Awareness
The most basic form of consciousness, also the aspect of consciousness that is prior to apperception, integration and rationalisation.
Consciousness
Best thought of in the Eastern sense of 'citta', a Sansrit word that means both 'mind' and 'heart'; that which is aware or conscious; but never in itself an object, always as the subject
Thinking
Conscious deliberation and also the spontaneous activity of consciousness
Time
Awareness of the duration between events or occurences
Sensation
That which the nervous and cognitive systems transmit
Perception
Cognition and re-cognition of the contents of sensation
Mind
Consciousness
Body
Like a VR headset used to navigate terrestrial environments
Good
One half of a pair
Happiness
Absence of pain, absence of conflict, absence of fear, awareness of harmony.
Justice
Ideally, the resolution of conflict and the establishment of:
Truth
That which is; satya; veritas.

My answer to all: There's a way of understanding each, that is not given by setting out their definitions in words but seen in the way they are used.

But further, any such string of words will be inadequate, failing to account for all uses.

Perception

Discrimination. — Moliere

I like this. A good synonym. It assumes a kind of interpreting. :up:



Interesting.

I realize you and me and “Being” have a long history haha— so I won’t go there.

There's a way of understanding each, that is not given by setting out their definitions in words but seen in the way they are used. — Banno

Okay…so how do you use them?

But further, any such string of words will be inadequate, failing to account for all uses. — Banno

True. Still, I’m sure you use these words like anyone else, and usually mean something by them. So that’s what I was asking for. If a kid would ask for your own take on these terms, would the answer be “it depends on use” or would you have some (albeit provisional) answer?

If a kid would ask for your own take on these terms, would the answer be “it depends on use” or would you have some (albeit provisional) answer? — Mikie

I'd use the term, and encourage them to use it, so the child can see how it is used.

so how do you use them? — Mikie

Early and often.

But yep, unhelpful. I'll leave my comments there.

I'd use the term, and encourage them to use it, so the child can see how it is used. — Banno

How would you use those terms if you do not know their definition? I think it is not possible to encourage them if you do not understand it, and to understand those terms you need previously a basic definition of each.

For example: let's say I have to write an essay on art. But how, if I do not know the definitions of "perception" or "aesthetics" (for example) previously?

Maybe I am understanding you wrongly. But it seems that you see the words just as random elements and avoiding their syntax functionality.

Definitions are a post hoc invention.

Can you define a word without just using more words...?
You can find "stampede" and "elephant" in a dictionary, which, in turn, uses more words.
Yet, there are no stampeding elephants in the dictionary.
Dictionaries (and their definitions) have circularities.
Board games on the other hand... :)

:up: A glossary is both more and less than a dictionary, no?

Yeah, well ... :smirk:

What is… — Mikie

I prefer I use the term ...

Being

to denote (i) a possible object, (ii) a possible version of the world or (iii) actuality (i.e. every possible version of the world).

Awareness

to denote attention to circumstances.

Consciousness

to denote being aware of awareness (i.e. attending to a state of attention and/or an act of attending); also, synonymous with mind (i.e. what sufficiently complex nervous systems do – minding).

Thinking

to denote reflecting on – examining, questioning – conventions or norms, givens, assumptions, biases, desires, habits, gaps in experience or knowledge or understanding, unknown unknowns, ... and prerequisites of thinking.

Time

to denote the metric of asymmetric, sequential changes (i.e. events); also, experiential disappearing.

Sensation

to denote bodily stimulation constitutive of perception.

Perception

to denote environmental stimulation constitutive of consciousness.

Mind

(See consciousness above.)

Body

to denote a dynamic kinetic system causally-related to other dynamic kinetic systems that rarely is also a 'conscious being' (i.e. embodied mind).

Good

to denote a zero-degree, or maximum reduction, of harm and dysfunction.

Happiness

to denote a zero-degree, or maximum reduction, of needs and/or fear.

Justice

to denote a zero-degree, or maximum reduction, of civil/social unfairness, harm and dysfunction.

Truth

to denote a zero-degree, or maximum reduction, of undecidability, error and nonsense.

Definitive list of definitions.

Of course, there is no such thing.
To write a definitive list of words used in philosophy. Funny. But nevertheless a seductive aspiration.

I agree with:

My answer to all: There's a way of understanding each, that is not given by setting out their definitions in words but seen in the way they are used.
But further, any such string of words will be inadequate, failing to account for all uses. — Banno

Nevertheless, I started to answer (with whatever came to mind, as requested) and got as far as this...

Being - existing ( anything that is); living ( rel. to human, animal, spirit, - real or imagined)
Awareness- how we understand ourselves to be, when awake. Different levels of perception, according to our senses.
Consciousness - a/a and being responsive; not unconscious.
Thinking - considering and imagining all kinds of everything.
Time - what we have too little of. Or too much of. To be and do all that we need/want to achieve for wellbeingness.

Off the cuff nonsense. I caught myself and I re-read the OP:

Take the attitude that there’s a fairly perceptive young person asking you. How would you answer? — Mikie

If this life student is asking questions about such things, then they already have a degree of knowledge.

Socrates asked similar questions 2,500 years ago. — Mikie

He asked questions of students. He made them think things through for themselves.
Starting with how much did they know or think they know...

Definitive list of definitions.

Of course, there is no such thing. — Amity

Of course. The title is tongue-in-cheek.

Off the cuff nonsense. — Amity

Your answers didn’t seem nonsensical to me.

If this life student is asking questions about such things, then they already have a degree of knowledge. — Amity

Sure. So what?

He asked questions of students. He made them think things through for themselves. — Amity

Yes, and usually triggered by the meaning of x. Whether justice or piety or virtue or whatever.

I prefer I use the term ... — 180 Proof

Fair enough.

Interesting list!

My answer to all: There's a way of understanding each, that is not given by setting out their definitions in words but seen in the way they are used.

But further, any such string of words will be inadequate, failing to account for all uses. — Banno

:up:

I agree with — Amity

I'd use the term, and encourage them to use it, so the child can see how it is used. — Banno

All kind of sounds like a cop out to me.

“What’s the aorta Dad?”
“Let me use the word so you can see how it’s used.”

Explaining what we mean, or think a word means, doesn’t require universal application or ultimate truth.

If the current fashionable state of philosophy is to answer with a slogan like “it’s how it’s used,” I think we’re in real trouble.

“What’s the aorta Dad?” — Mikie

The first response:
Why do you want to know?

“What’s the aorta Dad?”
— Mikie
The first response:
Why do you want to know? — Amity

That’s what your response would be?

Okay: “Curiosity.”

If this life student is asking questions about such things, then they already have a degree of knowledge.
— Amity

Sure. So what? — Mikie

It's the basis or grounding of more questions in a dialogue. Why do you ask? What do you think it is?

He asked questions of students. He made them think things through for themselves.
— Amity

Yes, and usually triggered by the meaning of x. Whether justice or piety or virtue or whatever. — Mikie

It's an idea of 'justice' related to action or behaviour and consequences.
Depending on context or circumstance.
In the case of a questioning child, then it would probably be framed as 'fairness'.

“Curiosity.” — Mikie

Desire to know or discover.

Yes, and usually triggered by the meaning of x. Whether justice or piety or virtue or whatever.
— Mikie

It's an idea of 'justice' related to action or behaviour. — Amity

Ideas have meaning. The dialogues pretty quickly transition into what is meant.

“Curiosity.”
— Mikie

Desire to know or discover. — Amity

Sure— but I was responding to your question of “why do you want to know”. If the kid said “curiosity,” then we’d either say we have no idea what an aorta is, or what it means as a word, or try our best to describe or define it in some way.

I don’t think using a kind of Rogerian technique in these circumstances is appropriate, however well-meaning the intention.

This surprised me a little so far:

Mind
(See consciousness above.) — 180 Proof

Mind
Consciousness — Wayfarer

Wasn’t expecting too much agreement.

Definitions are a post hoc invention. — Banno

On the one hand, the OP is saying: "give me the primary use for this word," but then everybody can specify their own. There's a little bit of a contradiction there.

What is…

Being
Yes. Being is what is. Being is, and nothing happens.
Awareness
...is the relation of responsibility. X is aware of y, iff x is able to respond to y.
Consciousness
... is the relation of responsibility to awareness.
Thinking
... is the digital processing function of mind.
Time
the dimension in which the nothing happens.
Sensation
... is that aspect of y of which x is aware.
Perception
... is a reification of a process, that is a reification of the happening of nothing.
Mind
... is the nothing.
Body
is some particular being considered as if separate.
Good
... is mind and world in the relation of alignment or mutual reflection.
Happiness
... is the responsive mind as distinct from the thinking mind.
Justice
... is social happiness.
Truth
... is the expression of the proper functioning of thought.


What is interesting me about this exercise is to arrive at definitions that are both faithful to (at least some of) the ways in which they are used in philosophy, and also relate to each other in ways that are somewhat significant of the individual's philosophy. That is, I hope the above tells the careful reader something about myself, or at least about the way I think that I think.

Sure— but I was responding to your question of “why do you want to know”. If the kid said “curiosity,” then we’d either say we have no idea what an aorta is, or what it means as a word, or try our best to describe or define it in some way. — Mikie

The child/teenager might have turned it around and asked, "Why do you want to know?"
The parent could answer with: It would help me better answer your question if I knew what prompted it.

I don’t think using a kind of Rogerian technique — Mikie

What's a 'Rogerian technique'?

Ideas have meaning. — Mikie

Yes. And any meaning can be hidden from view or understanding.

The dialogues pretty quickly transition into what is meant. — Mikie

Sure - but some dialogues stem from an experience, belief or understanding of moral issues.
As in the child/teenager scenario. What experience has made them curious about an aorta?

In Plato's Dialogues, is Socrates searching for a definitive definition of a concept?
Or the reality behind the word?

What is interesting me about this exercise is to arrive at definitions that are both faithful to (at least some of) the ways in which they are used in philosophy, and also relate to each other in ways that are somewhat significant of the individual's philosophy. — unenlightened

Yes, I think that is the idea behind the OP:

My guess is that this brief exercise will give a better overview of a person’s perspective than merely adhering to, or assigning, a label or school (realist, materialist, dualist, utilitarian, etc). — Mikie

I don't assign myself a label but others might. 'Rogerian'?

I hope the above tells the careful reader something about myself, or at least about the way I think that I think. — unenlightened

Really? One-line responses? Hmmm....

I hope the above tells the careful reader something about myself, or at least about the way I think that I think.
— unenlightened

Really? One-line responses? Hmmm.... — Amity

Yup. Stupid, keeping it simple! :yikes: And look, it works!

That is, I hope the above tells the careful reader something about myself, or at least about the way I think that I think. — unenlightened

I think it does. Still digesting some of those…

In Plato's Dialogues, is Socrates searching for a definitive definition of a concept?
Or the reality behind the word? — Amity

Neither.

In any case, I think my title has led some to believe I’m really asking that this list be definitive. I think I’ll remove that from the title, as it’s misleading.

'Rogerian'? — Amity

My fault. It’s my psychology background— Carl Rogers was a therapist, and the technique I was referring to was one in which the therapist provides no answers, but creates a conducive atmosphere where the patient discovers the answers for himself/herself.

Maybe this thread has had the unintended consequence of separating those brave enough to take a stab at it and those finding excuses not to. :joke:

Stupid, keeping it simple! — unenlightened

Simple and stupid? Now I know...thanks. I always wondered.

In Plato's Dialogues, is Socrates searching for a definitive definition of a concept?
Or the reality behind the word?
— Amity

Neither. — Mikie

So, what is it that Plato is attempting to do?

I don’t think using a kind of Rogerian technique in these circumstances is appropriate, however well-meaning the intention.
[...]
Carl Rogers was a therapist, and the technique I was referring to was one in which the therapist provides no answers, but creates a conducive atmosphere where the patient discovers the answers for himself/herself. — Mikie

So, you thought that I was attempting to situate the questioning as a kind of psychological therapy?
Does having a psychology background hinder or help you in forum interactions? Both/Neither/Other.
Are you always trying to figure people out, and affix labels, according to some little test or word exercise?

the unintended consequence of separating those brave enough to take a stab at it and those finding excuses not to. — Mikie

So, you thought that I was attempting to situate the questioning as a kind of psychological therapy? — Amity

No, but the aim (provide no answers but assist others in discovering their own) seemed similar.

Does having a psychology background hinder or help you in forum interactions? Both/Neither/Other. — Amity

Both.

Are you always trying to figure people out, according to some little test? — Amity

:lol: I suppose so. But more like getting to know them better. And I don’t consider this a “test,” really — although I can see how it would be viewed that way. I’m in no position to grade anyone’s work.