I don't need instruction from you on what should be my focus. That your computer is connected to the internet does not constitute evidence that it is the internet, or that the internet resides in your computer. I've misinterpreted nothing. Throughout this exercise, your language has been such that it posits reality as something apart. That's no fault of my understanding. The ambiguities to which you have referred exist only in your thoughts. They do not exist in reality. Perhaps your focus should be the ambiguties of your perceptions, rather than attempting to suggest that reality is something you can set on the table and examine.
Throughout this exercise, your language has been such that it posits reality as something apart. That's no fault of my understanding.
The ambiguities to which you have referred exist only in your thoughts. They do not exist in reality.
I'm not sure where this is going. All I wanted to understand was peoples processes in their 'percieving' of reality. The opening question does imply that they are separate but that's perhaps because of my 'clumsy' language. I don't doubt that reality is separate from anything. But you seem to skip past and not try to answer how the idea of reality is processed in your thoughts. Sorry if it has bothered you...
It hasn't bothered me. I have just been attempting to get you to state what it is that you wish to discuss, absent undemonstrated premises. You now have done that.
I'm asking you how reality is caught up in your thoughts. Broad as it may be and as phenomenological as you like.
Okay, disregard the opening thread question cos as Setanta points out, it's premise leads you to think that we are sperarate from reality. So, let me try clarify what my implication was: When you read the word 'CAT', what 'kind' of 'CAT' 'pops up' into your 'head space'? How does this work? Is trying to articulate it impossible?
You may need to start a new thead. Perhaps "Ambiguities of Perception" might be a good title?