Neither idealism nor anti-realism deny this. It's a mistake to equate "real" with "part of an external material world." — Michael
That's why I keep going back to the distinction based on truth, and maintaining that there are unknown truths. — Banno
Each perspective is as rationally coherent as the other — Merkwurdichliebe
You know this a priori?
'cause it don't seem right to me. — Banno
The assertion that there are 'unknown truths' is obviously only a surmise, because by definition you can never verify that until they're known. It's rather like the barber fallacy or any of those other set fallacies from Russell etc. — Wayfarer
And yet the alternative is that you know all there is to know.
Are you willing to claim omniscience? — Banno
That's why I keep going back to the distinction based on truth, and maintaining that there are unknown truths. — Banno
Since according to idealism the world is a product of Big MInd, not your mind or mine, then on that position there may indeed be truths that are not known. Have you read Berkeley at all, or are you at least familiar with his philosophy via secondary sources? — Janus
The point is that in either model, materialist or idealist. there is no problem that there should be truths unknown to us; which tells against your apparent claim that there could be no such truths under the idealist model, no? Or were you objecting because there could not be truths unknown to the Big Mind? — Janus
"Big mind" strikes me as a joke. The reality you have when you don't have a reality. It's a replacement for God, and so subject to the same problems as Joshs reply.not sure why you are still banging that drum. — Janus
My objection is not to the content but the structure of that argument. The "supernatural" element, even if "immanent", is introduced using a fraught transcendental argument*. It is the transcendental argument that is objectionable. — Banno
"Big mind" strikes me as a joke. The reality you have when you don't have a reality. It's a replacement for God, and so subject to the same problems as Joshs reply.
My objection is not to the content but the structure of that argument. The "supernatural" element, even if "immanent", is introduced using a fraught transcendental argument*. It is the transcendental argument that is objectionable. — Banno
The point is, the 'physical cup' exists - but it is not what we see. Our seeing of it is the overlay generated by our fantastically powerful VR-generating forebrain. What is physically real, then, does not exist in a meaningful sense - it only exists when it is seen to exist by an observer. — Wayfarer
your personal feelings are irrelevant — Janus
Well, go on then; if it is such a\ good argument, present it. — Banno
You did not present an argument, you made up a story. There is nothing to reply to. — Banno
A mind left too open soon fills with garbage. — Banno
My objection is not to the content but the structure of that argument. The "supernatural" element, even if "immanent", is introduced using a fraught transcendental argument*. It is the transcendental argument that is objectionable. — Banno
if "singularities are only what they are in reciprocal interaction with other singularites" then there are other singularities. Each account you give remains dependent on a something "external" to mind.
I maintain that all this theoretical stuff can be removed via the simple expedient of proposing realism. There is a world in which we are embedded, and which includes things we do not know.
Your arguments appear sophistic. Reality is a simpler option.
*and I mean argument of the form:
P; P only if Q; therefore Q.
It's valid, but only true if the second premiss can be demonstrated. — Banno
Just two different ways of talking as I see it, neither of which get to the heart of the question as to what the cup is "in itself". — Janus
A thing can persist as itself , and external to another thing, for so many milliseconds, for instance. — Joshs
There is no brand of realism that does not depend on a transcendental , — Joshs
The VR-generated you puts the VR-generated cup back in the VR-generated cupboard; what's the problem? — 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.