How simple are people?
-
@Rah1woot said in How simple are people?:
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.
-
@random said in How simple are people?:
Gonna use the word exist then. If you dont perceive something it doesn't exist.
Definitions:
- Exist
- Have objective reality or being.
- Objective
- expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
- a. of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind
b. involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects, conditions, or phenomena
- Reality
- the state of things as they actually exist [back to the definition of "exist", circular definition?] , as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them.
- the state or quality of having existence or substance.
- Mind
- the element of a person that enables them to be aware of the world and their experiences, to think, and to feel; the faculty of consciousness and thought.
- a person's ability to think and reason; the intellect.
- Substance
- a particular kind of matter with uniform properties.
- the real [back to the definition of "real"] physical matter of which a person or thing consists and which has a tangible, solid presence.
- Real
- actually existing [back to the definition of "exist"] 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.
- Being
- existence [lol]
- Existence
- the fact or state of living or having objective reality
...
Searching for and working with all these definitions is getting kind of annoying.
Well, anyway, I guess using them we could say that objective reality exist by arranging them like this:
- Objective reality = All real that is independent of conscious awareness
- Exist
-
@NoeticJuice if you dont perceive something, the thing is not. Lol
-
@random said in How simple are people?:
@NoeticJuice if you dont perceive something, the thing is not. Lol
@NoeticJuice said in How simple are people?:
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?
I don't know if we are actually disagreeing or just going by different definitions. Seems like you agreed with the definitions for "real" and "reality", so perhaps we could bypass the need for all these definitions with this question: "Do you think there's anything real beyond what we are consciously aware of?"
-
@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
-
@random I'll just leave these here then. I don't think there's anything else for me to do here anymore.
@NoeticJuice said in just3another3normal3person:
@Nomanarch said in just3another3normal3person:
Consciousness is the only given.Consciousness changes all the time . . . for something to change, there must be something else to make that change possible.
@NoeticJuice said in just3another3normal3person:
But if everything changes, then what does? Assuming that nothing stays the same, that there's no unchanging foundation, then change would just be something disappearing and another thing appearing out of nothing. And, of course, nothing comes from nothing.
And there wouldn't be any continuity
@NoeticJuice said in How simple are people?:
If there was nothing real to perceive, how could you perceive it?
Perhaps we could take the word "real" out of that sentence. It would still work and we'd need less definitions.
-
@random said in How simple are people?:
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
We. Our. The Collie I'm sitting rn may have something to say about this.
-
@NoeticJuice said in How simple are people?:
@random I'll just leave these here then. I don't think there's anything else for me to do here anymore.
@NoeticJuice said in just3another3normal3person:
@Nomanarch said in just3another3normal3person:
Consciousness is the only given.Consciousness changes all the time . . . for something to change, there must be something else to make that change possible.
The something else to make that change possible "is" once you perceived it, you can have thoughts that the thing was before you perceived it, that thought is an assumption, nothing wrong in it self with assumptions.
@NoeticJuice said in just3another3normal3person:
But if everything changes, then what does? Assuming that nothing stays the same, that there's no unchanging foundation, then change would just be something disappearing and another thing appearing out of nothing. And, of course, nothing comes from nothing.
I dont assume there is an unchanging foundation. Yes it would be. From our perception, we didnt perceive before we were born, from what we remember we went from nothing(no perception) to conciousness.
@NoeticJuice said in How simple are people?:
If there was nothing real to perceive, how could you perceive it?
