Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Hanging around

Expand Messages
  • joksu57
    Hello Maurice! In the 70 s when I studied Steiner s Philosophy of Freedom, philosophy became very interesting subject to me. Inspired by Dr. Steiner s views I
    Message 1 of 13 , Mar 3 12:11 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello Maurice!

      In the 70's when I studied Steiner's Philosophy of Freedom,
      philosophy became very interesting subject to me. Inspired by Dr.
      Steiner's views I started studying theoretical philosophy in a
      university in late 70's. Of course academic philosophy was some sort
      of a disappointment after PoF. But the history of philosophy was
      worth the trouble and from "new philosophy" e.g. the paradigm-concept
      of Thomas S. Kuhn was a helpful tool. After the "university years" I
      have propably been too lazy in studying philosophy and scientific
      subjects (there are just too many esoteric subjects to mess with!).

      It is nice to hear that consciousness is nowadays not treated as a
      mere attribute of matter. But still there are grave differences. We
      can take again the example of a "human being". So some modern
      thinkers can take the attitude, where the mind is almost accepted as
      a reality. When we think what man is after Saturn-, Sun-, Moon- and
      Earth-periods, the "accuracy-level" is remarkably different. Of
      course a human being is extremely large and difficult concept to
      study, because "we are the microcosm". What makes the subject even
      more harder is the fact, that we are in a "halfway position" and
      probably in Vulcan-period we can see, what it really means to be a
      human being. So there remains a lot of work in "bridging" the
      different paradigms.

      It is fine that you have interest and capability in this "philosophy-
      business". Please keep on reporting about your research!

      Warm Regards
      Joksu

      --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, Maurice McCarthy
      <maurice.mccarthy@n...> wrote:
      > On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 01:46:27PM -0000 or thereabouts, joksu57
      wrote:
      > >
      > > I also have my doubts about the outcome of those debates, when
      the
      > > paradigms are so different. E.g. a human being in "anthro-
      paradigm"
      > > means something totally different compared to "scientific-
      > > materialistic" paradigm. When even the basic concepts used in a
      > > discussion can mean different things, it is hard to come to some
      > > reasonable conclusion. My respect, though, to everyone, who have
      the
      > > patience to explain the basics of spiritual science to critics
      (who
      > > obviously have some other agenda than understanding AP or Waldorf
      > > education).
      > >
      >
      > With respect to materialism and how it has changed since Steiner's
      time
      > I've recently read Colin McGuinn's philosophical biography and am
      now
      > reading Paul Churchland's "Matter and Consciousness". Both are
      intended
      > for the lay reader but the latter especially is challenging.
      >
      > The big change is that the mind is almost accepted as a reality,
      > distinct from matter. Almost all cognitive scientists, neurologists
      and
      > Artificial Intelligence folk are funtionalists. In the terms of
      Human
      > and Cosmic Thought this is a form of dynamism and is adjacent to a
      > Leibnitzian-type monadology - which definitely affirms the
      existence of
      > subjective entities.
      >
      > Chomsky is the man most responsible for this change - that the mind
      is
      > born with a pre-configured modularity. As I see it this is within
      an ace
      > of declaring the soul.
      >
      > Maurice
    • Maurice McCarthy
      Dear Joksu Thanks for the encouragement. I battle on as best I can to understand and I ve always had an interest in the Big Issues. Years ago I played chess to
      Message 2 of 13 , Mar 3 5:22 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Joksu

        Thanks for the encouragement. I battle on as best I can to understand
        and I've always had an interest in the Big Issues. Years ago I played
        chess to a minor international level and though I lost more than I won
        there is perhaps only a single game in my recollection which I lost
        through a lack of strategy oversight. It was in the details that I lost
        my way - and 'the devil is in the details', as the saying goes.

        Essentially what I am trying to say in these little words is that RS
        died a whole human life-time ago teaching us the principle that reality
        alters and alters continually, even though some things appear more
        stable than others. It is a common human failing to stay with habit of
        thought rather than re-think afresh and we anthroposophists have just
        this failing as much as anyone else. This does not mean that RS is
        irrelevant (words from the spirit are the most stable of all and when
        Christ says 'verily, I say unto ye' then listen because what comes next
        is true for every level of consciousness and all time. This is why it is
        put 'verily'.) RS is not irrelevant but habit ossifies his words which
        slowly lose contact with living reality. It is up to us to rework the
        truth in our changed circumstances.`

        McGinn is a "monkey-hanger" - a term of endearment for a chap from
        Hartlepool in the North East of England. During the Napoleonic Wars they
        famously hung a monkey there for being a French spy ... ?!? (True story)
        In "The Making of a Philosopher" he writes to the effect that:
        In the technical works such as Syntactical Structures Chomsky argued
        that a child could not learn a language by the Behaviourist's stimilus
        and response but had to come pre-prepared with an implicit grasp of
        grammar. One of the key arguments was the limited resources a child
        posseses to develop rich grammar.

        Functionalism now easily arises from the observed necessity to
        thrust the mind into stimulus and response. Jerry Fodor is McGinn's
        colleague at Rutgers and McGinn says that he is generally acknowledged
        to be the best philosopher of mind in the world. (Anglo-Saxon philosophy
        is still a very male-ego oriented thing today.) Fodor's Language of
        Thought 1975 is considered one of the first robust statements of
        Functionalim which now puts the first, if still physicalised, emphasis
        on the How as opposed to the what.

        From our position we generally think that Computer Intelligence is just
        baloney from first inspection. I still agree but this speaking from
        habit. Be warned - there is a lot more credit to AI than we at first
        give it.

        Maurice




        On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 08:11:00AM -0000 or thereabouts, joksu57 wrote:
        > Hello Maurice!
        >
        > In the 70's when I studied Steiner's Philosophy of Freedom,
        > philosophy became very interesting subject to me. Inspired by Dr.
        > Steiner's views I started studying theoretical philosophy in a
        > university in late 70's. Of course academic philosophy was some sort
        > of a disappointment after PoF. But the history of philosophy was
        > worth the trouble and from "new philosophy" e.g. the paradigm-concept
        > of Thomas S. Kuhn was a helpful tool. After the "university years" I
        > have propably been too lazy in studying philosophy and scientific
        > subjects (there are just too many esoteric subjects to mess with!).
        >
        > It is nice to hear that consciousness is nowadays not treated as a
        > mere attribute of matter. But still there are grave differences. We
        > can take again the example of a "human being". So some modern
        > thinkers can take the attitude, where the mind is almost accepted as
        > a reality. When we think what man is after Saturn-, Sun-, Moon- and
        > Earth-periods, the "accuracy-level" is remarkably different. Of
        > course a human being is extremely large and difficult concept to
        > study, because "we are the microcosm". What makes the subject even
        > more harder is the fact, that we are in a "halfway position" and
        > probably in Vulcan-period we can see, what it really means to be a
        > human being. So there remains a lot of work in "bridging" the
        > different paradigms.
        >
        > It is fine that you have interest and capability in this "philosophy-
        > business". Please keep on reporting about your research!
        >
        > Warm Regards
        > Joksu
      • Maurice McCarthy
        Bradford asked about modules Chomsky holds intelligence to be of separate compartments and not an infinitely plastic unity. There is one for language but to
        Message 3 of 13 , Mar 3 5:51 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Bradford asked about modules

          Chomsky holds intelligence to be of separate compartments and not an
          infinitely plastic unity. There is one for language but to him it is
          specifically human. Animal or alien tongues may easily be
          unintelligible to a human. Intelligences are separate things - I think
          he is saying species specific.

          McGinn finds this relevant to what he calls Metaphilosophy, the
          philosophy beyond philosophy or philosophy of philosophy. I ask what is
          the love of knowledge for the love of knowledge? The pure willingness to
          understand - Christ as Anthropo-sophia, human wisdom. He say
          metaphilosophy is the most neglected and difficult aspect in all
          philosophy.

          Maurice.
        • Maurice McCarthy
          Children do not imitate speech, they create it: Lap me, Nanny! (My daughter at about 2 years old) Maurice
          Message 4 of 13 , Mar 3 5:53 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Children do not imitate speech, they create it:

            Lap me, Nanny! (My daughter at about 2 years old)

            Maurice
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.