The word "rock" means the solid mineral material forming part of the surface of the Earth and other similar planets, exposed on the surface or underlying the soil, — S
The contradiction is believing that their are external minds, but not external rocks when we basically have the same access or information to both. Idealism inexorably leads to solipsism. Solipsism is basically direct realism as the mind IS reality. So idealism defeats itself and realism has the final word.Some people, however, believe that there isn't a rock, because that would be a contradiction. — S
Archeologists are able to determine what long dead civilizations meant with their words, so the words still carry meaning through time - just like everything else. It is this meaning that scientists are getting at - the meaning of the scribbles on this vase, or the meaning of the vase itself. Just like everything else, it takes time and observation to come up with a consistent explanation of what some phenomenon means, or is caused by. With the necessary tools, like a Rosetta Stone or a microscope, scientists can get at reality and it's meaning. Meaning is the relationship between cause and effect.However, no one is there to understand what this word means, because we all died an hour previously. Does the word "rock" mean anything? Does it mean what it means in English? — S
That's indirect realism.Why can't it be a blend of realism and idealism like there are real objects but our minds modify their appearance to us? — TheMadFool
That's a definition, not a meaning. — Terrapin Station
They're not the same thing. — Terrapin Station
Objectively, the definition is just marks on paper, or activated pixels on a computer screen (or whatever particular thing we might be referring to). Meaning is a mental activity, a way that we think about things like marks on paper, sounds that other people make, and so on. — Terrapin Station
"Definition" is a handy term for the marks on paper, the text strings, etc. — Terrapin Station
I'm a realist on things like rocks. I'm an antirealist on things like meaning. — Terrapin Station
There are things that at least creatures with brains do, mental things--"mental" being a property of those brains functioning in particular ways, where those phenomena only occur in brains functioning in those ways (or perhaps in some other materials functioning in particular ways, too--but we're not aware of any mental activity outside of brains yet). Not everything is just a brain functioning mentally, but some things are. Not everything that brains do when they're functioning mentally is identical to some other phenomenon in the world, either (which is what some people who seem to want to insist everything is objective seem to believe). If we (and other creatures with similar brains) were to disappear, those sorts of phenomena would disappear. Just like if planets were to disappear, then phenomena unique to planets--like plate tectonics, for example--would disappear. — Terrapin Station
I accept that we rely on various mental or perceptual functions for various things, like seeing and understanding, and obviously we would need to be there to begin with. — S
So your challenge would be to point to the objective properties that are meaning. — Terrapin Station
Meaning is the relationship between cause and effect. — Harry Hindu
Right, and meaning is another one of those things. — Terrapin Station
We simply disagree on whether meaning is one of those things. — Terrapin Station
So your challenge would be to point to the objective properties that are meaning. — Terrapin Station
Meaning does not depend on understanding. That's your burden of proof, — S
I've already ruled out the alternative with a reduction to the absurd, — S
No idea what you're talking about there. — Terrapin Station
So I guess you can't point to the objective properites that are meaning? How surprising. — Terrapin Station
Then pay closer attention. I told you that I was talking about the hypothetical scenario and what I conclude from it. — S
You are being evasive and you seem to be confused about how the burden of proof works. — S
Right, and planets are objective things that exist independently of not just minds, but everything else. Your mind is external to mine and is therefore as real as a planet and it's unique phenomena. If plate tectonics are an objective feature of reality, then meaning (by your own definition, not the definition I use) would be an objective feature of the reality too.There are things that at least creatures with brains do, mental things--"mental" being a property of those brains functioning in particular ways, where those phenomena only occur in brains functioning in those ways (or perhaps in some other materials functioning in particular ways, too--but we're not aware of any mental activity outside of brains yet). Not everything is just a brain functioning mentally, but some things are. Not everything that brains do when they're functioning mentally is identical to some other phenomenon in the world, either (which is what some people who seem to want to insist everything is objective seem to believe). If we (and other creatures with similar brains) were to disappear, those sorts of phenomena would disappear. Just like if planets were to disappear, then phenomena unique to planets--like plate tectonics, for example--would disappear. — Terrapin Station
Right, and planets are objective things that exist independently of not just minds, but everything else. Your mind is external to mine and is therefore as real as a planet and it's unique phenomena. If plate tectonics are an objective feature of reality, then meaning (by your own definition) would be an objective feature of the reality too. — Harry Hindu
Still no idea. You could spell it out (or at least reference what you're talking about so I can look at it again), or I can just not worry about it. — Terrapin Station
There is a rock, but no one is there to perceive it, because we all died an hour previously. Is there a rock? Yes or no? — S
And "subjective" would be an objective feature of reality being a function of minds, which are an objective feature of reality. How is that I am able to be aware of your mind and your meanings without using my senses in some way?Again, I use the word "subjective" to refer to brains functioning in mental ways. — Terrapin Station
Why would it matter how many brains? We don't make that same distinction when it comes to planets and how they function.Meaning is not an objective feature by my definition, because objective refers to the complement of brains functioning in mental ways. — Terrapin Station
Cool. — Terrapin Station
And "subjective" would be an objective feature of reality being a function of minds, which are an objective feature of reality. — Harry Hindu
I don't know how to respond. Why can't it be a blend of realism and idealism like there are real objects but our minds modify their appearance to us - the image.
So the object continues to exist without mind but the image is gone. — TheMadFool
Archeologists are able to determine what long dead civilizations meant with their words, so the words still carry meaning through time - just like everything else. It is this meaning that scientists are getting at - the meaning of the scribbles on this vase, or the meaning of the vase itself. Just like everything else, it takes time and observation to come up with a consistent explanation of what some phenomenon means, or is caused by. With the necessary tools, like a Rosetta Stone or a microscope, scientists can get at reality and it's meaning. Meaning is the relationship between cause and effect. — Harry Hindu
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.