It seems to me that both words are nouns, and nouns are persons, places, or things. — creativesoul
Well they are not things in the sense of being determinate objects; and I think the idea that you think they are such things is what Banno was criticizing.
Activities and processes are better thought of as doings or becomings, not as beings. I have had this disagreement with you before; where I have pointed out that there is pre-linguistic believing and thinking, but that it is misguided to say that there is pre-linguistic having of or holding beliefs or thoughts, because the latter is a confused way of talking that suggests that pre-linguistic beliefs and thoughts are determinate objects which can be mentally 'held'. This is a deceptive analogy with the notion of physically holding an object that many minds fall into; and I believe Banno is right to think that you are one of them. — Janus
That's just layman's talk. — creativesoul
Do you find that such talk is somehow instrumental to the position I argue for? I mean, do you find that I cannot effectively set out thought and belief without saying those things? — creativesoul
To sum that I would say that thoughts and beliefs as the kinds of things that can be held; are dependent on language; whereas thinking and believing as organic pre-linguistic processes are not. It's not rocket science! — Janus
I don't know what you mean by "elemental constituents". Are you proposing some kind of reductive atomism? — Janus
Because words enable thoughts and beliefs to be held before the mind in determinate forms. — Janus
All you are saying is that the constituents are what thought and belief consist of; which is really saying nothingat all or just expressing a tautology. So, what exactly are those constituents? — Janus
...words enable thoughts and beliefs to be held before the mind in determinate forms. — Janus
Well, if all you are saying is that animals think and believe, then what you claim is nothing controversial, but something that I believe most would take for granted. — Janus
Well not really. It's expressing the fact that all thought and belief are existentially dependent upon other things. — creativesoul
The position I'm arguing for has the broadest scope of rightful application that I am aware of. It rightfully applies to everything ever thought, believed, spoken, and/or written - as a measure nonetheless. I don't think most folk would take that for granted. — creativesoul
...verbal expressions of thought are determinate objects...you know, like written words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs and texts and auditory sounds and combinations of sounds, and so on. — Janus
I can't see that you are arguing for any position which does not merely consist in truisms; tautologies which no one would deny. I'm sorry to say I can't find anything substantive there to either disagree with, or to use as a beginning point for further discussion. — Janus
What, you mean like we have to have experiences of things and events before we can have thoughts and beliefs about them?
If that's what you mean, it's obvious, but experiences of things and events don't constitute thoughts and beliefs about them; surely there is a distinction between constitution and dependence. — Janus
When you speak of holding thought and belief, in order for you to meet your own precision standard, you ought be talking in terms of holding expressions of thought and belief. — creativesoul
All thought and belief consist of the same set of elemental constituents. — creativesoul
...the beliefs are held only within the verbal expressions of believing, otherwise they would not be expressions of believing. In other words you hold a belief only as an expression of believing; the believing itself, as process, cannot be held. — Janus
This(notion of holding belief) is a deceptive analogy with the notion of physically holding an object that many minds fall into; and I believe Banno is right to think that you are one of them. — Janus
...If thought and belief are not determinate objects, and verbal expressions of thought and belief are, then it only follows that verbal expressions of thought and belief are not equivalent to thought and belief. — creativesoul
...the beliefs are held only within the verbal expressions of believing, otherwise they would not be expressions of believing. In other words you hold a belief only as an expression of believing; the believing itself, as process, cannot be held. — Janus
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.