What makes you think your "non-trivials" are a different kind of problem? — bongo fury
What makes you think your "non-trivials" are a different kind of problem? — bongo fury
Different paradigms consist in attenuated ideas, theories and beliefs, non-trivials, which indeed may not be translatable into each other's terms
There's no relation between the two. "Scaling-up" and a "non-critical attitude" - those two aren't related. You caught the tail-end of a longer conversation. But the two are unrelated. — ZzzoneiroCosm
Currently untranslatable non-trivial conceptual schemes exist, but this untranslatability may be alterable somehow. — Enrique
If you have had those kinds of experiences and insights then you may indeed have reason to place your faith in them, but if you haven't, then someone trying to convince you of their veracity will be speaking a different language, analogous to trying to describe colour to a blind person; a waste of everyone's time, in other words.
I think post-Enlightenment thinking is largely what makes it possible for millions of people with vision to care about the experience of someone who is blind in general — Enrique
but not every individual with normal vision regards describing visual experience to the blind as an unconditional waste of time. — Enrique
I suspect Enlightenment thinking is what made the dignifying of human life in general with social programs a government institution, though opposing trends are also in effect. — Enrique
I suppose the issue is how we define social success. If its easier for some individuals to translate between their experiences, and they collectively compose the majority, should the minority be excluded completely? — Enrique
Can we grow a culture that not only imposes minimum and constantly violated legal obligations, but also fosters self-imposed respect or even compassion for every human being transcendent to relative translatability of concepts or any additional criteria? — Enrique
The assessment of translatability depends on beliefs regarding the functions, boundaries and possibilities of discourse. A subject very much in the domain of the humanities, though I gather you guys have more of an analytic approach. Maybe this discussion's angle of reasoning can help bridge the divide. I may be making nearly self-evident claims lol What do you think? — Enrique
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.