But the idea of the 'independently existing material object' - that is surely what has been called into question by science itself. That is what Hoffman alludes to in that quotation above - he's referring to the observer problem, which is exactly that the purported 'mind-independent' sub-atomic particles, only exist as a kind of distribution of probabilities, up until the moment that a measurement is taken. Of course this fact has triggered enormous volumes of debate and theory, and I'm not wanting to open that can of worms here. But it is precisely the notion of the 'mind independent reality' that has been called into question by that. — Wayfarer
But this could also be viewed as humanity is one being, explaining the common experiences. — Punshhh
Yea. How do the monads see one another if they're windowless? — Mongrel
Aristotle, in De Anima, argued that thinking in general (which includes knowledge as one kind of thinking) cannot be a property of a body; it cannot, as he put it, 'be blended with a body'. This is because in thinking, the intelligible object or form is present in the intellect, and thinking itself is the identification of the intellect with this intelligible. Among other things, this means that you could not think if materialism is true… . Thinking is not something that is, in principle, like sensing or perceiving; this is because thinking is a universalising activity. This is what this means: when you think, you see - mentally see - a form which could not, in principle, be identical with a particular - including a particular neurological element, a circuit, or a state of a circuit, or a synapse, and so on. This is so because the object of thinking is universal, or the mind is operating universally.
….the fact that in thinking, your mind is identical with the form that it thinks, means (for Aristotle and for all Platonists) that since the form 'thought' is detached from matter, 'mind' is immaterial too. — Lloyd Gerson
In fact L's view is very much in line with the notion that life is a stage and monads are merely actors upon
Each substance is like a whole world, and like a mirror of God, or indeed of the whole universe, which each one expresses in its own fashion – rather as the same city is differently represented according to the different situations of the person who looks at it. In a way, then, the universe is multiplied as many times as there are substances, and in the same way the glory of God is redoubled by so many quite different representations of his work. In fact we can say that each substance carries the imprint of the infinite wisdom and omnipotence of God, and imitates them as far as it is capable of it. (DM 9 WF 61) — Discourse on Metaphysics 1686
Next: innate ideasBut Leibniz does not stop here, as he might have done; he further claims that the human mind expresses its body by perceiving it, perception being a species of expression.
Jolley, Nicholas. Leibniz (The Routledge Philosophers) (p. 103). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.
Each substance is like a whole world, and like a mirror of God, or indeed of the whole universe, which each one expresses in its own fashion.... — Leibniz
2. I'm having trouble with this one.
But Leibniz does not stop here, as he might have done; he further claims that the human mind expresses its body by perceiving it, perception being a species of expression.
I'm having trouble with this one.
But Leibniz does not stop here, as he might have done; he further claims that the human mind expresses its body by perceiving it, perception being a species of expression. — Mongrel
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.