The next enlightenment will be the ultimate concept.

@Tuna,

Quote:

A word is not a concept

It's not? since when? I thought that even the word "word" is a concept.

2 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Can this possibly get any more pretentious?

2 Replies

@Ragman,

Quote:

Can this possibly get any more pretentious?

Not since you are here.

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

I thought that even the word "word" is a concept.

Multiple words can express the same concept. Word and concept are not identical.

No need for belligerence. I'm not attacking you.

1 Reply

@Ragman,

Quote:

Can this possibly get any more pretentious?

Absolutely. Why do you ask?

0 Replies

@Tuna,

Quote:

No need for belligerence. I'm not attacking you.

Sorry, I did not mean to offend and I did not think you did either.

Quote:

Word and concept are not identical.

I think you are somewhat correct, A word is a word, it is not a number nor anything else that is not relevant, it is a part of language used to describe something. A word is a simple concept, another constructed concept of our thoughts.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

I think you are somewhat correct, A word is a word, it is not a number nor anything else that is not relevant, it is a part of language used to describe something. A word is a simple concept, another constructed concept of our thoughts.

Words are brought together to construct sentences. Sentences are uttered to express propositions.

The ubiquitous philosophical example is: The cat is on the mat.

I can use words to express this proposition. Or I could draw a picture. The first words ever expressed may have been hieroglyphics. There's a theory of the origin of language that picto-grams preceded spoken language. See Chris Stringer.

But we don't know. What we know for sure is that concepts somehow transcend any particular medium of expression..

2 Replies

@Tuna,

I think we can probably carry on without anymore crap from people like Ragman. That's a good thing.

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

They did?

Yes. That was obvious if you read some of the available literature on it.

Quote:

Who was they?

'They' in this case was the 'science' of psychology.

Quote:

Do you think that your source could have some of it wrong? Do you think they may have a misleading bias?

Now I'm not sure you actually read my reply to your example. When I called 'their' concept of it 'Bullshit', what do you think that implies?

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Would you mind sharing a link to the source you found to be BS

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

This one is fairly representative

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763410000795

The abstract alone has enough to get the gist, no need to buy the full article. Helps to know some of the jargon though.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

The abstract alone has enough to get the gist, no need to buy the full article. Helps to know some of the jargon though.

I am not sure what you walked away with when you read the link but I walked away with very little info.

I would like to share with you a neuroscientist who claims to be a pro social psychopath. I have seen where some person has tried to use his talks counter-productively.

I think if you research his ted talks you will find a more informed video.

1 Reply

@Tuna,

It is nice to see you researching. Wink

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

Leadfoot Quote:
"The abstract alone has enough to get the gist, no need to buy the full article. Helps to know some of the jargon though."

I am not sure what you walked away with when you read the link but I walked away with very little info.

I would like to share with you a neuroscientist who claims to be a pro social psychopath. I have seen where some person has tried to use his talks counter-productively.

I think if you research his ted talks you will find a more informed video.

I watched the TED talk you linked to and got the same info and impression as I did from the link I posted. The TED guy was more focused on extream examples but the basic conclusions are the same. My conclusion about both is the same as well. There is a phenominon underlying their research but I doubt they have a clue as to what is going on.

FWIW, anyone who thinks they can understand brain function related to behavior and draw conclusions like theirs by studying either cadaver brains or live ones using MRIs is full of ****. That's like trying to understand a computer using only a hammer and chisel for tools.

0 Replies

The only "last enlightenment" I know of started with the beginning of the XX century and the death of the very idea there is such a thing as an actual extrutural cultural leap forward in human understanding...rather we have contextual, very fragil, fluctuations, profoundly linked to common wealthare and economical middle class growth....stupidy keeps extructuraly rulling as it always did !

...as for "ultimate concept" what on Earth does that even means ?
Concepts are povs...not ultimate reality...suffices to say an ecosystem is made of equilibrium where povs are superceeded by meta structures...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

...as for "ultimate concept" what on Earth does that even means ?

"Morality" A concept of morality that has been expanded upon to be the best or most extreme of its kind could be the next enlightenment. An ultimate concept of morality.

We have expanded upon many other concepts too far extremes yet morality is still in its infancy. What reason do we have for this? Could it be that morality is not on our minds very much?

0 Replies

The next enlightenment will be the ultimate concept.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know