"Hearing voices" is something that happens in the head, when the primary auditory cortex is activated. We then judge this to either be a response to external world sounds or to be an hallucination. — Michael
I like naive realism in the above. Scientific realism is already too indirect, in my view. — plaque flag
Well, I would say that the scientific evidence proves scientific realism and disproves naive realism. You might think that question begging, but I think I have more reason to believe in the truth of science that in your theory about language. — Michael
I don't think science answers metaphysical questions — plaque flag
The world from the person's perspective ,"see the world through different pairs of eyes" and the external world, "the same world". — RussellA
I don't think perception has anything to do with metaphysics. Perception has to do with biology and psychology, and so science is the appropriate tool to use. — Michael
I've tried to shift the focus to us talking about the apple and not the image of the apple — plaque flag
That's precisely why the indirect realist says that there is an epistemological problem of perception. You seem to be arguing that because we don't like the conclusion we should reject the premise, which is question-begging. — Michael
I would argue that our modern scientific understanding of the world, such as that of quantum mechanics, the Standard Model, string theory etc. support that conclusion above. There's just a mass of fundamental wave-particles, bouncing around, interacting with each another, and when the right stuff interacts in the right way, there's the conscious experience of seeing a red apple. — Michael
So you’re shifting focus away from perception. — Michael
We see the red apple and not its image — plaque flag
it's still there if we close our eyes ---and still red. — plaque flag
Whether you describe a rock “ordinarily” or “scientifically”, neither is more fundamental than the other. Each serves it own purpose to adequately and accurately described our experiences. — Richard B
The Indirect Realist would say that "something caused the idea of a rock". — RussellA
One could reword as "something in the external world caused an idea of a rock in the mind" — RussellA
I think I am. I believe I've already explained and argued for this above. It's true however that I'm not a metaphysical realist as described in the quote you provided.
The key point is that one sees the apple and not an image of the apple. Hence 'direct.' — plaque flag
I don't think perception has anything to do with metaphysics. Perception has to do with biology and psychology and physics. and so science is the appropriate tool to use. — Michael
Couldn't there be a metaphysics of perception? — Moliere
Isn't that the distinction between direct and indirect? — Moliere
Such as RussellA's worlds, where there is an external world and an internal world? — Moliere
And the indirect access adds a metaphysical entity in between ourselves and reality, which is directly perceived but not real. — Moliere
Again, more than one world. The world from the person's perspective ,"see the world through different pairs of eyes" and the external world, "the same world". — RussellA
And the indirect access adds a metaphysical entity in between ourselves and reality, which is directly perceived but not real. — Moliere
:up:Which I think kind of goes to show that there's something of a choice going on between positions, and our choices are largely based upon faults we see in the other position (hence accepting our own) — Moliere
What does it mean for it to be red when not being seen? — Michael
It's the same world viewed by different people with eyes in different places. — plaque flag
To be consistent, the indirect realist cannot say “rock”. The only meaning this term could mean by this theory is “some object” or “something”. — Richard B
Are you familiar with Markus Gabriel's ideas? — Janus
But language is a symbolic system, where words symbolise what they represent. — RussellA
Therefore, the meaning of "world" must be relative to the users of the language. — RussellA
In fact as many meanings as there are people using that language. — RussellA
There is the epistemological problem of how we know the nature of reality, given the problem that between our mind and the external world are our senses, and the senses alter any information arriving at our minds from the external world. But we can only discuss these things using language. — RussellA
We may be worlds apart in our world views, but then again, the world is a strange and mysterious place. — RussellA
The language, its users, and the world are primordially unified — plaque flag
The world is all that is the case. There is genius in that simple statement. — plaque flag
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.