9
   

Could there possibly be an edge to existence itself.

 
 
layman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 03:42 am
@fresco,
To be is to be perceived. If I think I'm "looking" at a tree, I'm just fooling myself. In truth I am "creating" it with my mental images (imagination). If I "look away" from it, it no longer exists. It's "existence" is solely in my mind. So said Berkeley. And Fresco.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 03:47 am
@layman,
I think they both reached a consensus... Laughing

I am starting to get the reason Fresco loves fuzzy Logic...
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 03:50 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
My question to Fresco is why on hell did he created such an annoying array of characters like myself to wipe his azz in this forum ? Sounds a tad masochistic...
layman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 03:57 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
Sounds a tad masochistic...


Yeah, if I ever run across him on the street, he's gunna wonder why he imagined those brass knuckles on my fist and his busted up face, I suspect.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 04:55 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
The fact that, after I read it, Heidegger appeared to be saying the same thing about "existence" as myself was quite gratifying. So if you want to blame anybody for the traditional labeling drones on this thread, you could have a go at him. After all, one of his "selves" turned out to be a Nazi !

NB "Fuzzy Logic" is related to the dynamism involved in differentially assigning set membership. "Social consensus" is involved every time we use socially acquired language to co-ordinate our interactions.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 05:02 am
@fresco,
Brilliant reply...
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 06:10 am
@layman,
The fact that you think that what I have written supports Berkeley goes a long way towards explaining why you got the wrong end of the stick about SR. You have major comprehension problems obvious to everybody but yourself.
layman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 12:49 pm
@fresco,
Just answer the damn question instead of trying to evade the issue with non-sensical red herrings and non sequiturs, eh, Fresco, ya solipsist, ya.

It was:

Quote:
Let me put the question another way, Fresco. Are you a dualist, a monist, or something else?
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 01:01 pm
@layman,
Ooh good ! A labeling game !

As I speak I'm the temporary chairman of a committee of selves. One member is a non-dualist constructivist. Another is a neo-pragmaticist. A third is an epistemological behaviorist. A fourth is a semi militant atheist. A fifth is an amateur poet. And a sixth doesn't suffer fools gladly.

Now its your turn !
layman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 01:19 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
One member is a non-dualist constructivist


Just say it, fool. You're a monistic solipsist, ain't ya?
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 01:25 pm
@layman,
Hang on, that one's gone for a walk, you'll have to wait!

Lets start your labels. There seems to be ...a school drop-out, a street wise ex-bar tender, an amateur intellectual reactionary, a skilled cutter and paster, an obsessive-compulsive,.......anything to add ?

Wait a minute...that first one just texted me to say that he follows Wittgenstein's view that there is no such thing as "private language", so the label "solipsist" is ridiculous.
layman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 01:30 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
Lets start your labels. There seems to be ...a school drop-out, a street wise ex-bar tender, an amateur intellectual reactionary, a skilled cutter and paster, an obsessive-compulsive,.......anything to add ?


Not really, except this: [*kicks rock*]
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 01:31 pm
@layman,
Really ! I didn't realize you were on them.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 01:36 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
Wait a minute...that first one just texted me to say that he follows Wittgenstein's view that there is no such thing as "private language", so the label "solipsist" is ridiculous.


Yeah, right, eh?

Quote:
Of all philosophical positions and forms of speculation known to mankind, solipsism is perhaps the most extreme and paradoxical. The remarkable thing about affirming the existence of the solus ipse as the only known and testable instance and source of existence for the universe is that this affirmation seems to be reached as an extreme logical conclusion of both idealism and empiricism, two otherwise irreconcilable doctrines of thought.

There are few, if any, consistent doctrinaire solipsists in the Western tradition. The best known instances of solipsistic talk (not always accepted as such) are given by George Berkeley and, closer to our days, by Husserl and Wittgenstein.


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=26&ved=0CDsQFjAFOBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.english.fsu.edu%2Fjobs%2Fnum1112%2F053_MARCULESCU.PDF&ei=sZ8ZVaDyIoOpNuG_gtAF&usg=AFQjCNFsW06_Oe6Qo09844oVE5tMwIsovw&sig2=wbWOtmrj2UuOSysH9_mDhg


You finally fess up, quite unintentionally, by claiming solidarity with Wittgenstien, the "doctrinaire solipsist," eh? Thanks for the answer.
layman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 01:54 pm
@fresco,
As this same author notes, solipsistic-leaning philosophers always "try" to deny their solipsism:

Quote:
Solipsism as qualifier is, in philosophical parlance, an insult, and even the suspicion of flirting with it stigmatises one with ignominious guilt. As a consequence, a philosopher contaminated by it, however slightly, will retreat into philosophically more sound positions by trying to deploy his own kind of realism, phenomenological (cum corpore, cum conscientia),transcendental, communicational, empirical, dialectic, scholastic, etc....

The laconic dictum, ‘esse est aut percipi aut percipere,’ [to be is to be perceived (or to perceive)] which summarises the impossible central solipsistic position,...nevertheless haunted several powerful and critical minds, among whom Fichte, Wittgenstein, and Husserl, let alone Husserl’s, progeny: Sartre and Merleau-Ponty.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 02:11 pm
@layman,
You just flunked your cutting and pasting exam !

Quote:
There are few, if any, consistent doctrinaire solipsists in the Western tradition. The best known instances of solipsistic talk (not always accepted as such) are given by George Berkeley and, closer to our days, by Husserl and Wittgenstein.


There are dozens of references to Wittgenstein's rejection of solipsism. Wittgenstein is tough going. You've got even less chance with him than with Einstein.

Anyway, enough of this adolescent sparring. If you've got anything original to say about "existence" please do. In short Put Up or Shut Up.

Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 02:11 pm
Bumping up this thread, its getting hot and fun ! Keep at it lads makes up good reading !
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 02:13 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
... (not always accepted as such)...


Yeah, sure, not always "accepted as such" by denialists like you. So what?
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 02:15 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
If you've got anything original to say about "existence" please do. In short Put Up or Shut Up.


No, nothing original at all. Just this: [*kicks rock*]
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2015 02:28 pm
There is no middle ground on this one Fresco...either you believe there is a reality beyond your perception or you don't.

A smart six year old understands the argument in 5 minutes max.

Also do you have any idea how you sound in 2015 with your authoritarian slap the kiddo pseudo academic cop out 70's style ?

If you had just a bare idea how most academics are looked at by true intellectuals these days...a bunch of useless parasites and but suckers immersed in obscure academic parlance without an original thought in their minds...bureaucrats of the worst kind except in some hard sciences areas where indeed there is still an honest academic effort for knowledge...

...man you are nasty when someone pisses you off...it shows, and it shows your true colours...

...you should look at JLNobody more often...although he is on your side camp he shows a lot more restrain. A gentleman. You on the other hand behave like a spoiled brat when someone pisses on your turf !
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/23/2022 at 12:25:39