How simple are people?
-
@random
What about this mindset in a war zone?
Too late. You failed to invent RADAR because you were busy educating your universities about how "nothing you can't see actually exists". You failed to detect the enemy aircraft. Your city has been completely razed to the ground. You died when your apartment building collapsed due to a bombing.
-
@NoeticJuice said in How simple are people?:
@random I kinda wish we could just transmit thoughts through telepathy, bypassing language...
Anyway, definitions:
- Real
- actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed.
- existing or occurring in the physical world; not imaginary, fictitious, or theoretical; actual
- (of a thing) not imitation or artificial; genuine.
- Reality
- the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them.
- the state or quality of having existence or substance.
@random said in How simple are people?:
reality is what a being perceive, if you perceive/feel something it exist, if you do not perceive/feel it it doesnt exist.
If we use the definitions I found online, then I don't think what you wrote is the whole picture. It would make more sense to say that there are real things even when we don't perceive them. And when we do perceive them, our experience of them is a mixture of ourselves and of the real thing outside of ourselves. If there was nothing real to perceive, how could you perceive it?
Gonna use the word exist then. If you dont perceive something it doesn't exist. It didnt exclude that experiencing something could potentially be perceived as a phenomenon that mix/unite 2 things, 2 subjects, yet it still happen with in you at least in part, just isnt objective perception.
@random said in How simple are people?:
Yes we cant have any purely objective knowledge. It doesnt make an individual subjective reality and knowledge less valuable
I agree. At least to an extent.
@NoeticJuice said in Quotes from books:
"There are certain modes of attention which are naturally called forth by certain kinds of object. We pay a different sort of attention to a dying man from the sort of attention we'd pay to a sunset, or a carburettor. However, this process is reciprocal. It is not just that what we find determines the nature of the attention we accord to it, but that the attention we pay to anything also determines what it is we find . . . [attention] creates, brings aspects of things into being, but in doing so makes others recede. What a thing is depends on who is attending to it, and in what way . . . One way of putting this is to say that we neither discover an objective reality nor invent a subjective reality, but that there is a process of responsive evocation, the world 'calling forth' something in me that in turn 'calls forth' something in the world."
The Master and His Emissary (2019), p. 133
Ian McGilchristYea potentially partly based perspective, much more based than "objectivity"
- Real
-
@Rah1woot said in How simple are people?:
@random
What about this mindset in a war zone?
Too late. You failed to invent RADAR because you were busy educating your universities about how "nothing you can't see actually exists". You failed to detect the enemy aircraft. Your city has been completely razed to the ground. You died when your apartment building collapsed due to a bombing.
Nah that's confused take. why would i not invent the radar, if i hear of an Idea of war planes, even if i didnt see one, i can still act to verify if it exist or not, and then invent the radar
What you dont perceive doesnt exist, yet you Can still have an Idea about something that does not exist and the idea in your mind in it self exist if you perceive it
-
@random I accept your surrender.
-
@Rah1woot said in How simple are people?:
@random I accept your surrender.
You need to brain power max, you cant read properly. Just Said thats a confused take
-
@random You lost.
-
-
Nomane Euger in the one man multiverse. And I thought I had trust issues.
-
Stop doing this please chap.
-
-
That's the spirit.
-
-
@Rah1woot "Objectivity" is potentially an idea used as a scheme to make people believe that there are things truer than their feelings, experiences, and instincts, so that they are more inclined to ignore or act against them, so that they are more docile and willing to do things they don't like. Such as in certain religious texts
-
@random said in How simple are people?:
Objectivity is potentially an idea used as a scheme to make people believe that there are things truer than their feelings, experiences, and instincts, so that they are more inclined to ignore or act against them, so that they are more docile and willing to do things they don't like. Such as in certain religious texts
Discernment has an e-motional component. It's not meant to be pleasant by default.
-
This post is deleted! -
@NoeticJuice if you dont perceive something, the thing is not. Lol
-
This post is deleted! -
@random I suppose that's fair. I square the circle by just considering "how good I feel" to be an objective force in itself. The downstream result of properly functioning cells. Which I think is fine if we consider the pain of a hand on a hot stove to also be an objective force, as I do.
Ironically enough. I tend to think that of the Medical Ideology stuff as being exactly "subjectivity". Their problems are the result of them not considering the objective pain that they cause, being too narrowly focused on, to your credit, a perverted and warped authoritarian objectivity used to sell drugs. "Because I don't actually feel the pain of the patient in front of me, it doesn't exist, so I can do whatever I want to them".
-
@NoeticJuice No, there's nothing that "is" beyond or other than what we are conscious of, until we perceive it, and then the New thing aint beyond or other, it is part of our conciousness
-
This post is deleted!
