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

Re: [existlist] Re: Thinking about thinking.

Expand Messages
  • eupraxis@aol.com
    Again science supplants the the fuzzy philosophies of the past. I do not despise the old philosophers but the microscope did more to advance knowledge
    Message 1 of 43 , Aug 3 10:43 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      "Again science supplants the the fuzzy philosophies of the past. I do not despise the old philosophers but the microscope did more to advance knowledge about thinking than all the blabber in the dense tombs of classical philosophy."

      Bill,

      How so? I understand that it uncovered an entire biological universe, but how did it advance any knowledge on thinking?

      Wil







      -----Original Message-----
      From: William <v.valleywestdental@...>
      To: existlist <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Wed, Aug 3, 2011 12:40 pm
      Subject: [existlist] Re: Thinking about thinking.







      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "josephson45r" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
      >
      > Bill,
      >
      > If hypotheses. experimentation, observation, and facts require thought, how does thought not demand understanding? If you maintain that the observer is incapable of observation, you throw out science itself.
      >
      > Mary
      > Mary, thought comes before understanding how can it demnd anything of the unknown? As to the deposite you have posited I speed read things that give me a headache, that is worse than Sartre. Bill
      > "For, firstly, the empirical sciences do not stop short at the mere observation of the individual features of a phenomenon. By the aid of thought, they are able to meet philosophy with materials prepared for it, in the shape of general uniformities, i.e. laws, and classifications of the phenomena. When this is done, the particular facts which they contain are ready to be received into philosophy. This, secondly, implies a certain compulsion on thought itself to proceed to these concrete specific truths. The reception into philosophy of these scientific materials, now that thought has removed their immediacy and made them cease to be mere data, forms at the same time a development of thought out of itself. Philosophy, then, owes its development to the empirical sciences. In return it gives their contents what is so vital to them, the freedom of thought—gives them, in short, an a priori character. These contents are now warranted necessary, and no longer depend on the evidence of facts merely, that they were so found and so experienced. The fact as experienced thus becomes an illustration and a copy of the original and completely self-supporting activity of thought." Hegel
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
      >
      > > Again science supplants the the fuzzy philosophies of the past. I do not despise the old philosophers but the microscope did more to advance knowledge about thinking than all the blabber in the dense tombs of classical philosophy.
      >









      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Mary
      ... Perhaps I was childish to wish them away, because they were real for her. I recall my fear and the need to control her `heretical perception; the chain
      Message 43 of 43 , Aug 21 7:51 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        > It may seem obvious to you that they were not there. However, to her, my guess is they were. Popular and sensible opinions are perhaps not always right... And why is one person's perception of reality more valuable than another?
        >
        > Sliced like bread it is potentially toast, mold, a sandwich, gone. It is precisely the ability to perceive one thing as another that intimates possibility.
        >
        > Arcing Lied
        >

        Perhaps I was childish to wish them away, because they were real for her. I recall my fear and the need to control her `heretical' perception; the chain of events and consequences became predictable. The mental health biz hasn't improved, because it's predicated on utility rather than phenomenology, philosophy, or possibility.

        But perception isn't an ability; it just happens. Doubt and valuation require thought. Reason—thinking about thought—is similar to proprioception and, however imperfect, bridges the abyss between perception and action.

        Sufficiently similar perceptions and reason among us have been useful, but insistence on consensus has also been disastrous and seems the next king to dethrone.

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