To say that the our fields of perception alone give us phenomena i think is contrary to phenomenology, which Kant may have have been the first author of. Mentally we have, or for now have, a "frame" and we put all our sensations on this 2d frame in order to organize it. The phenomena of the window behind me is behind me, and the noumena could be anywhere. I even think sounds exist objectively. A reality outside of us — Gregory
How can a thought be named ? — RussellA
Is it the case that we have the thought of a cup and then name it….. — RussellA
In order to write the sentence "Sorry, but I don't think there is such a thing as a "thought of a cup."" you must have had the thought of a cup. — RussellA
No. I read certain philosophy, and found it was wrong. There's a tad too much presumption in your prognosis. And very little of any substance to your replies. — Banno
What has changed? To reply, "I've thought about a cup" doesn't help enough. We know that; what we want to know is, How are we to understand this thought event if it isn't a thing and it isn't an image? — J
It is never the case we think with language, or by means of it. — Mww
We think, and name that which is thought about, the object of thought, cup. — Mww
MANY years ago, by sheer accident I put a chainsaw into my left foot. — Mww
That every single word ever, and by association every single combination of them into a whole other than the words themselves, being at the time of its instantiation a mere invention, is for that very reason entirely private? — Mww
No. I knew instead what "a thought of a cup" would mean in the context of our discussion. When I think about a cup I'm doing something, but no "thought of a cup" exists. — Ciceronianus
Walking, eating and thinking are activities we engage in — Ciceronianus
We look at the world and see an object that has been given a name by the Community within which we live. — RussellA
Hume's principle of constant conjunction….. — RussellA
…..one can have the thought of an object independently of any name it may or may not have been given. — RussellA
for example what I understand by the word "tree" is unique to me, as no one else has had the same life experiences. — RussellA
I am not sure even Kant says you have a 2nd frame where your sense contents get transferred into for further organisation. — Corvus
Anyway, like you, some people seem to interpret Kant as a naive idealist who claims that you have objects in your mind, and that they are the real objects. There are objects in the external world, which cause the senses to perceive the objects, but you don't know if they are the real, and there is the world of Thing-in-Themselves independent of your perception. — Corvus
Interesting way to define the role of Metaphysics : to give us a general "background" understanding of how the world system functions. Aristotle described how the natural world works in his Physics, then, in the section known as Metaphysics, looked into how the Cultural (mental) realm imposes human will onto Nature.Metaphysics sets out the background against which the world is ordered, and is as much fiat as observation. One can avoid the circularity by recognising this. — Banno
Superficially true, but insufficient to explain empirical discovery by a solitary subject. — Mww
.Hume's principle of constant conjunction...............has more to do with the relation of cause and effect than to perception and cognition — Mww
But you just said the name is given by a relevant community, and if “tree” is that name for an object looked upon in the world by yours…..how can it be unique to you? — Mww
For me, Philosophy is a retirement hobby. But personally, I prefer collecting new ideas instead of old furniture. The difference is ideal vs real archetypes. Which is more valuable depends on where you "store your treasures". :smile:Nice place to be. But how is it different to collecting antiques? — Tom Storm
Can you give me an example of non-speculative, empirically proven, Metaphysics? Chemistry may be the least speculative form of Physics. But, some people denigrate Quantum Physics because its inherent uncertainty invites speculation.It's because of my conversations with others about metaphysics that I have arrived my position. And note, I didn't say 'no need for metaphysics', I said no need for certain speculative forms thereof. — Tom Storm
Can you give me an example of non-speculative, empirically proven, Metaphysics? — Gnomon
Is it possible Kant was just a Platonist? — Gregory
Is there nothing I can do to make you explain something? By any standard, you're just too vacant and glib. Is this what analytic philosophy's positivism has done to you? An economy of expression of such efficiency that sparsity itself is its primary tenet?If you haven't been able to follow the thread so far, there's not much point in continuing. — Banno
Are you certain that Transcendental Idealism is about free-floating fantasies? Or is that just a prejudice against philosophical Idealism (science of ideas)? The OP is looking into "preconditions of experience", one of which is Life and another is Sentience (Mind ; Consciousness). Are those topics fantastic, and off-limits, to you? Is it a waste of time to discuss the reality behind physical appearances, that Kant called ding an sich (essences)? And what cognitive psychologist Donald Hoffman called "core reality"?But lack of certainty is no reason adopt an untrammelled fantasy life. — Tom Storm
. The issue here is principally how one can establish what is the case in the world at the level of philosophy, the most basic level, without an analytic of the structure of the relation between the known and the knower. — Astrophel
The issue here is principally how one can establish what is the case in the world at the level of philosophy, the most basic level, without an analytic of the structure of the relation between the known and the knower. — Astrophel
it pleases some of us to 'find' meaning, and others not to find meaning. — Tom Storm
The OP is looking into "preconditions of experience", one of which is Life and another is Sentience (Mind ; Consciousness). Are those topics fantastic, and off-limits, to you? — Gnomon
Apparently, you free-associate Metaphysics with Religion & Spiritualism. — Gnomon
Have you seen anyone on this thread talking about gods & ghosts? — Gnomon
Put another way, a metaphysic is a statement of what must be the case, in order for the world to be as it is. — Wayfarer
I don't think you can justify 'must be the case'. You can presuppose it. You can wish it. But can you say it must be true? Mostly metaphysics are tentative theories aiming to explain why the world seems to be how it is. But I don't think we even have a way of establishing precisely how the world is, let alone answering the why part. — Tom Storm
Parallax can be used to determine the distance of an object, as nearby objects show a larger parallax than farther objects, but it doesn't allow us to see the back of a three-dimensional object.
What is parallax doing? Is it giving us information about the distance of an object from us or is it giving us information about the three-dimensional space that the object occupies? — RussellA
I don't think you can justify 'must be the case'. You can presuppose it. You can wish it. But can you say it must be true? — Tom Storm
Logical principles and arithmetical proofs are often included under that heading — Wayfarer
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.