5.621 The world and life are one.
I need a logical way to dismiss it. — GLEN willows
Our whole lives consist in streams of imagery, a unique stream to each person. From out of those concrete streams we abstract the fictive things which remain timelessly the same, which make up the world of familiar objects, about only which is it possible to derive a world of facts, a world consisting totally of facts, a world that is the totality of facts. But this world is never experienced; it is a lifeless attenuated world of the mind. — Janus
On this view, hairdryers and toothpicks are just handy ways to organize sensations...and electrons and quarks are just handy ways to organize hairdryers and toothpicks. I seem to see other people, but I can't be sure, because what I mean by person is roughly what I mean by 'I,' this existence I know 'directly.' My states of mind, my thoughts and sensations, are phosphorescently present for me, infinitely intimate. I can no more be wrong about what I mean by a word or how I see a patch of color than 2 + 2 can equal 5. And so on. I extend the same courtesy to you out there, behind the mask of your face and its smiles and grimaces, just in case you exist back there.
I think there's a POV trick to be sussed out here. We see others from the outside and ourselves from the inside. So it's plausible that individuals depend on their sense organs and brain as mediators for them of their environment. But if we try to build only from the inside, we talk nonsense. We call everything sense-data while ( pretending to be ) no longer taking the sense organs and objects affecting them in the 'outside' or 'public' world for granted. The stereoscopic key may be remembering that the entities populating the 'inner' and 'outer' worlds are part of the same causal/explanatory nexus.
There is nothing interesting in that pedantic world of facts except the science and math it makes possible. For me there is nothing interesting in chasing your tail trying to establish how our propositions are to be justified; because they can never be justified by the rich streams of imagery which constitute our actual lives. So, for me the best course for those who love science and math is to "shut up and calculate" and enjoy the richness and artistry of math and science (which logic totally lacks). — Janus
There is nothing interesting in ... trying to establish how our propositions are to be justified; because they can never be justified by the rich streams of imagery which constitute our actual lives.
Apparently. (He probably wouldn't accept your apology.) — 180 Proof
Do you understand the difference between an instance of something being good, and the ideal good, the best thing? — Metaphysician Undercover
As Pie pointed out, no one can logically prove there are other minds. — GLEN willows
What is "ridiculous" is assuming a perspective for which there are not any grounds to assume and then use such an groundless assumption as a conditional or premise.Can you see that if you were the only mind, these arguments would be ridiculous. — GLEN willows
Can you put this argument into that form? — GLEN willows
Can we put can the conclusion "we know there are other minds" into a formal logic equation? — GLEN willows
Can we put can the conclusion "we know there are other minds" into a formal logic equation?
Premise
Premise
Conclusion? — GLEN willows
Frankly I'm still surprised that people can't even IMAGINE that we could be brains in vats - which Descartes attempted to disprove but didn't ....or on future virtual reality ventures...or extended dream states. — GLEN willows
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.