So do you agree that experience cannot be said to exist? You either have it, or don't have it. You can only have experience of something if you had perceived something from the empirical world. You can only be aware of your own experience. No one else's. I don't have a single scooby clue what experience you have. I just know of my own. — Corvus

I think I was clear with what I said. If you are not in Australia then you cannot experience Australia.

It is just feeling the pain, not experiencing it. Experience happens when I conceptualise the pain from the memory, and tell someone about it. I experienced the pain of getting kicked. You seem to confusing between feelings and concepts. — Corvus

Feeling pain is a sort of experience and I am not talking about concept here.

It is the same thing. When I watch movie, I am having visual and auditory perception. — Corvus

But visual and auditory perception are sorts of experiences.

Experience is an abstract mental state, which is a concept. It is not sensation or perception. — Corvus

Experience is a conscious event that contains information, whether it is perception, recalling memory, having emotion, etc.

I think I was clear with what I said. If you are not in Australia then you cannot experience Australia. — MoK

Experience is a word of empty shell when it is said with no information on the owner and content i.e. whose experience it is, and what the experience is about.

Experience is a conscious event that contains information, whether it is perception, recalling memory, having emotion, etc. — MoK

Ditto

But visual and auditory perception are sorts of experiences. — MoK

Ditto

Feeling pain is a sort of experience and I am not talking about concept here. — MoK

Experience is only meaningful when it was given with the info about the owner and content of the experience. "Experience exists" says nothing meaningful. Experience is one's mental content which only the experiencer knows, and cannot be said to exist until described in intelligible language to other humans.

Experience is a word of empty shell when it is said with no information on the owner and content i.e. whose experience it is, and what the experience is about. — Corvus

Of course, I am not an Idealist so by experiencing I mean that there is an agent who experiences something.

Who is the agent, and what is the experience about?

Could you please continue this discussion in another thread?

Me, you, etc.

Could you please continue this discussion in another thread? — MoK

I don't jump into a thread where the OP has been engaging discussion with the other folk. It wouldn't be fair to the party criticised by more than one debater, whoever happens to be criticised, supported or condoned in the debate.

That action would be like ganging up with others like the gangs in the streets, and wouldn't be fair for the lone defender. It would not likely yield true and fair conclusions, and anyone ganging up in the debates are not neutral or genuine debaters. Waiting for 1:1 engagement is my etiquette in debates. I am quite happy to wait, and take things easy and slow.

You know philosophical debates not all about proving one is right and the other is wrong, one is better than the others, one knows more than the others etc. That would be pointless psychological masturbation.

Philosophical discussions are for pursuit of fair truths by all parties involved in the discussions motivated by mutual fairness, good spirits and eudaimonia.

Let me know when you ended the engagement in the other thread, then I will read the OP to see if I have any points to contribute in the argument. :)

Me, you, etc. — MoK

Well, frankly I don't know anything about your experience, hence it would not be meaningful to agree your experience exists. X cannot exist, if X passed and belong to the past, or if X is unknowable. So "MoK's experience exists." would be a meaningless statement to me, unless MoK tells me what the experience is about MoK was meaning.

I know my own experience which need to be conceptualised into linguistic form, if someone wants to hear about it.

I don't jump into a thread where the OP has been engaging discussion with the other folk. It wouldn't be fair to the party criticised by more than one debater, whoever happens to be criticised, supported or condoned in the debate.

That action would be like ganging up with others like the gangs in the streets, and wouldn't be fair for the lone defender. It would not likely yield true and fair conclusions, and anyone ganging up in the debates are not neutral or genuine debaters. Waiting for 1:1 engagement is my etiquette in debates. I am quite happy to wait, and take things easy and slow. — Corvus

I have no problem being criticized by many. It would be nice of you if we could continue this discussion in another thread since our discussions relate to that thread and your question could be a question from others.

You know philosophical debates not all about proving one is right and the other is wrong, one is better than the others, one knows more than the others etc. That would be pointless psychological masturbation.

Philosophical discussions are for pursuit of fair truths by all parties involved in the discussions motivated by mutual fairness, good spirits and eudaimonia. — Corvus

Correct.

Well, frankly I don't know anything about your experience, hence it would not be meaningful to agree your experience exists. X cannot exist, if X passed and belong to the past, or if X is unknowable. So "MoK's experience exists." would be a meaningless statement to me, unless MoK tells me what the experience is about MoK was meaning.

I know my own experience which need to be conceptualised into linguistic form, if someone wants to hear about it. — Corvus

Yes, let's focus on you. Could we agree that you are an agent and have certain experience?

I have no problem being criticized by many. It would be nice of you if we could continue this discussion in another thread since our discussions relate to that thread and your question could be a question from others. — MoK

You seem to have strong psychology. Cool man. :up:

Yes, let's focus on you. Could we agree that you are an agent and have certain experience? — MoK

Am I an agent? No, I am just a bundle of perceptions.

Do I have certain experience? I do. But I need to dig out the past events which are dead and gone now from my memory, and then package into concepts called experience.

It is a kind of reduction of the past memories into the conceptualised concept called experience.

Does it exist? Experience only exists in one's mind. Could we call it as existence? You tell me.

You seem to have strong psychology. Cool man. :up: — Corvus

MoK a Dragon, what do you expect?

MoK a Dragon, what do you expect? — Arcane Sandwich

Do dragons have horns? Never seen one with the horns must admit.
I thought it was some type of bird, but not sure now. Could we call it drabird? A mixture of dragon and bird? Better ask MoK himself on that, suppose.

Do dragons exist? When saying X exists, it must be supplied with at least three properties.
1) The location of existence (In mind or in the world)
2) The structure of existence (what it is made of)
3) Time of existence (past present or future)

Without the qualities of existence, claim of existence sound unclear.

All of your questions have their corresponding answers in the 2nd and 3rd Editions of the Draconomicon.

I am afraid I am not familiar with dragons.

If you want to know more about them, I just gave you two references.

I would only be interested in their nature and status of existence in ontology and epistemology.

All of that is in the references that I told you.

ok thanks.

No problem, happy to help :up:

Here's more information about the references:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draconomicon

Am I an agent? No, I am just a bundle of perceptions. — Corvus

So you are an idealist. So you are not made of physical?

Do I have certain experience? I do. But I need to dig out the past events which are dead and gone now from my memory, and then package into concepts called experience. — Corvus

How could you have memory? Memory must be stored somewhere.

It is a kind of reduction of the past memories into the conceptualised concept called experience. — Corvus

How could you construct any coherent thoughts if you are mere perception? Any coherent thought requires a memory of ideas you experienced in the past. It also requires a process on the memory as well.

Does it exist? Experience only exists in one's mind. Could we call it as existence? You tell me. — Corvus

What is the mind to you?

So you are an idealist. So you are not made of physical? — MoK

I am not an idealist. I don't belong to any of these isms. My ideas are flexible depending on what topics we are talking about. I am perceptions means that when I try to find my own self, all I can find is a bundle of perceptions about me i.e. perceptions on the body and the content of mind. There is nothing called an agent in me at all. You need to read Hume's A Treatise of Human Nature to understand this point.

How could you have memory? Memory must be stored somewhere. — MoK

There is no place called memory. Maybe there is biologically and physically, maybe you can locate where the memory functions happening in your brain. But I suppose it would be a topic of brain science, rather than Metaphysics.
When I can remember something, I call that function of mind as memory. The object which is remembered is called "the content" of memory.

How could you construct any coherent thoughts if you are mere perception? Any coherent thought requires a memory of ideas you experienced in the past. It also requires a process on the memory as well. — MoK

Again you need to read "A Treatise of Human Nature". Everything that appears in your mind is perception including ideas and impressions on the external objects in the world, the contents of memories and imagination, feelings and sensations, emotions etc. They are all types of perception.

What is the mind to you? — MoK

Mind is, again, a bundle of perception. If you don't have perception, then you don't have a mind. You just have a body. Mind needs its body where it is generated from. When the body dies, the mind evaporates too.

I am not an idealist. I don't belong to any of these isms. My ideas are flexible depending on what topics we are talking about. I am perceptions means that when I try to find my own self, all I can find is a bundle of perceptions about me i.e. perceptions on the body and the content of mind. There is nothing called an agent in me at all. You need to read Hume's A Treatise of Human Nature to understand this point. — Corvus

I didn't say that there is an agent in you. I said whether you are an agent by this I mean you are physical with a set of properties.

There is no place called memory. Maybe there is biologically and physically, maybe you can locate where the memory functions happening in your brain. But I suppose it would be a topic of brain science, rather than Metaphysics. — Corvus

The existence of memory is very relevant to the philosophy of the mind.

When I can remember something, I call that function of mind as memory. — Corvus

That is called recalling memory.

The object which is remembered is called "the content" of memory. — Corvus

Correct.

Again you need to read "A Treatise of Human Nature". Everything that appears in your mind is perception including ideas and impressions on the external objects in the world, the contents of memories and imagination, feelings and sensations, emotions etc. They are all types of perception. — Corvus

I call all of these experiences rather than perception. Please do not offer me to read a book on a topic that does not address my points.

Mind is, again, a bundle of perception. If you don't have perception, then you don't have a mind. You just have a body. Mind needs its body where it is generated from. When the body dies, the mind evaporates too. — Corvus

So, how could you have coherent thoughts and memory if the mind to you is just a bundle of perception?

I call all of these experiences rather than perception. Please do not offer me to read a book on a topic that does not address my points. — MoK

I only offered the Original Text by Hume, because it answers everything you have been asking about.

So, how could you have coherent thoughts and memory if the mind to you is just a bundle of perception? — MoK

I thought it was obvious. This is what I mean. The answer is in the book by Hume "A Treatise of Human Nature". Having not read it causes folks in confusion and mystified state of their knowledge on the obvious facts. Thoughts are also perception. :)

I didn't say that there is an agent in you. I said whether you are an agent by this I mean you are physical with a set of properties. — MoK

Of course you did. But as I am not an agent, I was looking around me, and in me and in my mind to see if I am an agent. I couldn't find any impressions or ideas matching an agent at all. At this point, I was wondering what made MoK to imagine I was an agent.

I thought it was obvious. This is what I mean. The answer is in the book by Hume "A Treatise of Human Nature". Having not read it causes folks in confusion and mystified state of their knowledge on the obvious facts. Thoughts are also perception. — Corvus

Could you please quote a part of his book on this matter or elaborate on your understanding of his book?

Of course you did. But as I am not an agent, I was looking around me, and in me and in my mind to see if I am an agent. I couldn't find any impressions or ideas matching an agent at all. At this point, I was wondering what made MoK to imagine I was an agent. — Corvus

No, I didn't. I asked whether you are an agent. By agent I mean you are physical with a set of properties. So, again, are you an agent? Yes or no.

No, I didn't. I asked whether you are an agent. By agent I mean you are physical with a set of properties. So, again, are you an agent? Yes or no. — MoK

Well if that is your definition of agent, I would day your definition is not quite right. Please consult the dictionary on the meaning.


agent
/ˈeɪdʒ(ə)nt/
noun
1.
a person who acts on behalf of another person or group.
"in the event of illness, a durable power of attorney enabled her nephew to act as her agent"
유의어:
representative
negotiator
business manager
emissary
envoy
factor
go-between
proxy
surrogate
trustee
liaison
broker
delegate
spokesperson
spokesman
spokeswoman
frontman
mouthpiece
rep
2.
a person or thing that takes an active role or produces a specified effect.
"these teachers view themselves as agents of social change"

I am a person, and have physical body of course with the usual properties. I am not a dragon or bird, if you didn't know.