Re: (From OWL): Mind in Objectivism
- --- In Starship_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Ed Minchau
<spider_boris@y...>" <spider_boris@y...> wrote:
I only bring up those two
> names to show the analogy between physics and etymology:im such an idiot sometimes. I don't mean etymology at all. I mean
- --- "Ed Minchau <spider_boris@...>" <spider_boris@...>
> --- In Starship_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Ed MinchauAha, that's a different matter. You remind me of Kant's claim that
> <spider_boris@y...>" <spider_boris@y...> wrote:
> I only bring up those two
> > names to show the analogy between physics and etymology:
> im such an idiot sometimes. I don't mean etymology at all. I mean
> :) ed
space and time are not "out there", nor do they represent anything
about what really exists "out there"; that they are mere "forms of
perception" which the human psyche "forces" on the "amorphous stream of
raw data" presented to the senses. As obviously fallacious as Kant's
position is, he most certainly gave a tremendous push to the philosophy
of science, because his view takes to extreme the more moderate
observation that the human "framework of perception", namely space and
time as intuitively implicit in perception, does not necessarily
correspond _exactly_ to the actual properties of spacetime. This led to
many productive hypotheses about spacetime, including non-Euclidean
geometries and special and general relativity.
However, how exactly this relates to the discoveries supporting the
view that the mind is _physically_ present (and actively developing) in
the brain I am not sure I understood, beyond the fact that the two
classes of discoveries were made roughly in the same time-frame.
Perhaps the paradigm change involved is also similar, in forcing people
to rethink and reform some of their most fundamental and intuitive
concepts (space, time; body, mind). The willingness to reform such
fundamental concepts certainly requires exercise.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.