I agree a change might be known by a sensation. I don't think this is helpful in defining or understanding the notion of change; because it is so general as to nearly apply to anything.Now, do you agree that we have a sensation of change? If no, why not? — Bartricks
No, I don't think this is correct. Some sensations are very different, so equating them in this fashion is confusing and misleading. A sensation of self-immolation does not resemble a sensation of watching a pendulum swing and yet they are both types of change.And if there is a sensation of change - and there does appear to be - do you agree that sensations can only resemble sensations and nothing else? — Bartricks
The concept 'true' is an artefact of human language and it (mostly) means something like 'everyone clever enough would agree'. I argue it means this on the grounds that this is the use context in which we find the term. — Isaac
We thought we knew X but we were wrong. We didn't know X because not X. — Michael
Take yellow. We are aware of yellow by sensation. Yet we can infer that an object is yellow despite never having seen it. — Bartricks
I am talking about what change itself is. You are talking about when people infer it. I am talking about the 'it' they are inferring. — Bartricks
Supposing your model of information is true; what does it add to note change is subject to it. I could say for example; then ____is a sensation if, that is, there is a sensation of ____ . Why choose to fill the blanks with "change" as opposed to any other subject? — Cheshire
↪Cheshire Because the question I am addressing is 'what is change?' — Bartricks
Do you have any objection to the argument? — Bartricks
It sounds a bit like obsessing over ideals leads to the thought that there's a place they come from? Maybe there is, but the ideas I know of seem to rattle around in this world. And there's communication among animals about their physical environment. So, plenty of examples of ideas existing within the physical realm. I'm in no place to judge Penrose's interpretation of mathematics, but hesitant to suppose another realm of existence just to fill in the space my ignorance occupies.It takes its name from the ancient Greek thinker Plato, who imagined that mathematical truths inhabit a world of their own — What is Math?
Supposing your model of information is true; what does it add to note change is subject to it. I could say for example; then ____is a sensation if, that is, there is a sensation of ____ . Why choose to fill the blanks with "change" as opposed to any other subject?If the latter is true - and it is, of course, for the sensible world just is the place that our sensations resemble - then change is a sensation if, that is, there is a sensation of change. — Bartricks
A sensation cannot 'tell' us anything - sensations do not have little mouths or little notepads on which they might write things. Insofar as our sensations give us some awareness of something other than themselves, they do so by resemblance: that is, our reason tells us that there is a world out there that our sensations (some of them) are resembling. — Bartricks
Now, there is nothing like a sensation except another sensation. Thus, if we have a sensation of change, then change itself must be a sensation. — Bartricks
↪Cheshire I don't understand your point. The argument I provided was seductively valid, so you have to dispute a premise. Which one are you disputing? — Bartricks
1. There is a sensation of change
2. A sensation can only resemble another sensation (and so if a sensation is 'of' something, then what it is of is itself a sensation)
3. Therefore, change is a sensation. — Bartricks
It is hard to separate how the enlightened might appear versus speculating about the internal state. I'd suppose for contrast an unenlightened person being very anxious and insistent regarding their state of enlightenment.Ok. I don't think it's uncommon for notions like unattachment and detachment and apathy to merge into a maelstrom of studied indifference in mainstream Western eyes. — Tom Storm
Always happy to be an inspiration.I think Mr. Cheshire just means that he doesn't understand and can't imagine what is meant by "Enlightenment" in the context we are discussing it. That allows him to reject its value with a smug sneer. — T Clark
Can you say more? Do you mean to say that unattachment is a less pejorative manifestation of apathy? — Tom Storm
I stated that in both instances there was an imposition.
In the other instance where there was no desire to block the sidewalk, there was no imposition, because there was no desire to impose anything. Desire plays a key role, which I think I've highlighted. — Tzeentch
One cannot seperate these things, even if one wanted to. One never experiences the external world directly - everything goes through the mind. — Tzeentch
I'm not sure how compelling you will find it , but the point was to isolate what happens in the physical from your perception and argue these claims of imposing seem to translate as measures of either ego or willingness toward dogmatism. In one case I'm blocking the sidewalk and in the other I'm blocking the sidewalk. However, I am only imposing upon you in one case. So, I submit the definition is problematic.↪Cheshire If you have a point to make, make it. — Tzeentch
I don't know. What would you call it? — Tzeentch
Excellent, so there is a differentiation. If the situation were the same but I don't see you or block your path by happenstance. Then, what would I call it?Yes, for it was not a mere persisting. The refusal implies to consciously attempt to deny. — Tzeentch
Yeah, this problem goes all the way back to the Cold War where the US government always had the issue of whether it was better to invest in either butter or bullets. Since we have almost always had to spend more money on our military than pretty much all other countries combined it is pretty much a given which of the two gets the most attention. I have a feeling that this isn't going to change at any time in the near future. — dclements
I think we'd have to settle this before making further progress. Where's the limit? At the extremes any perceived opposition to one's will becomes another's "imposition". Suppose I refuse to stand aside while you walk down the sidewalk. Has my mere persisting as a physical being managed to become an "imposition" by unnatural definition?Depending on the situation it sure can be. — Tzeentch
It's not matter of cardinal order. Unless you want to argue that limiting one's ability to trespass is an imposition. At which point we are using "impose" in an unnatural way in order to support some ideal or dogmatic sense of personal permanent right of way.Well, the individual was there before society, so who was the first to impose? — Tzeentch
So when someone imposes, that gives another a right to impose as well? After the drunk driver is imposed upon does he then also get a right to impose back? How does this system work? — Tzeentch
Since that discussion has been been more or less exhausted as to what could be talked about, I thought it might be better to discuss a even bigger issue of China's desire to become the dominant super power in the world and whether they can achieve such a goal. — dclements
One opinion takes into account the context of drunk driving. The public pays for the roads and as a result should claim some right to use them. A critical mass of drunk drivers would make roads unusable; in a normal sense. Really, it's the intoxicated driver imposing their will in other's space.What makes one opinion better than the other? — Tzeentch
↪Cheshire You don't seem to grasp the point — Bartricks
But, we can generalize change to sensation and make any number of statements? What is the motivation for this slight of hand?we can’t appeal to another change as then we are trying to explain change with change — Bartricks
That's not a view about what change 'is'. — Bartricks
I'm going off pure pattern recognition. Change is an interesting topic and fertile ground for some new ideas I imagine. But, when it's creationism being served under a guise I end up sifting through 300+ posts to find a position I wouldn't have invested in refuting. If I'm wrong, then there is no concern. Motives matter in the sense a life is finite.How is there an exception? Either an argument is sound, or it is not. At no point do the motives matter. — Bartricks
From the reader's perspective it is the question being begged. Hence the early opposition.that has nothing to do with what I was saying. — I like sushi
Seems honest. I can respect that.Yeah, I could’ve done a much better job with the original post. I did think about editing but thought it would be messy. — I like sushi
There you simply express a prejudice: you believe any analysis is false that implies the existence of a god, yes? Why? — Bartricks