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

Re: Meth or Ether

Expand Messages
  • fictiveparrot
    ... I don t agree, I think. I don t know if you think of 2 and 4 and it is blue or a sound in your understanding when compared to how I process thought. You
    Message 1 of 24 , Mar 31, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      > So there is both a sense in which you and I can
      > think the same thought (entertain the same thought
      > content) and a sense in which we cannot think the
      > same thought (your thought tokens are yours and
      > even by swapping brains I cannot own your thought).

      I don't agree, I think. I don't know if you think of 2 and 4 and it is blue or a sound in your understanding when compared to how I process thought. You have no idea how I process mine, so it is a pretty big claim to think at all that we have the same anything. If you intuit 4 as blue and 2 as orange it might make more sense when you cant add 2 + 2, and some people can't (orange + orange = blue?).

      You are not really showing much imagination by coming to solid conclusions. It also seems to be taking quite a lot for granted. You have clearly not understood what I think my thought model is here, because if you did, you would agree with me...

      I neither have your thought at the same or different times, and I likely don't think it in exactly the same way, with the same dimensions, or similar associations. When I have a thought, it is me that digests it and attempts to reiterate it -- it is not a thing that I duplicate and put on a conveyor belt.

      My guess is that any time you are pretty sure, you are probably wrong.

      Geddit Wrong
    • fictiveparrot
      ... Did you think you had cleverly cornered me? I believe that was exactly what I was suggesting. His ideas are his and he should stop blaming other people for
      Message 2 of 24 , Mar 31, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        > > Well, if you think it, it is necessarily yours.
        > > How do you think someone else's thoughts?

        > Well then, how are Wil's thoughts not his own?

        Did you think you had cleverly cornered me?

        I believe that was exactly what I was suggesting. His ideas are his and he should stop blaming other people for them and be prepared to defend them. He is giving his ideas false glory and grandeur by attributing them to someone else who has a more respected name -- and dissuading argument. It's a sorta cheap trick. I don't care what he thinks Hegel might have said via his interpretation.

        If you are going to stand on the shoulder of gnats, you might as well go ahead and squash them.

        Mihaithoughtz Mihone
      • wsindarius
        I do not mention other writers to give my own thoughts credence. I mention them so as to give those I am having a conversation with a reference. Only if I am
        Message 3 of 24 , Mar 31, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          I do not mention other writers to give my own thoughts credence. I mention them so as to give those I am having a conversation with a reference. Only if I am asked what I think X said about Y will I try to speak for that author, and it is always understood that such interpretations are both my own and are subject to criticism.

          Wil


          -----Original Message-----
          From: fictiveparrot <knott12@...>
          To: existlist <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sun, Mar 31, 2013 8:04 pm
          Subject: [existlist] Re: Meanderthings





          > > Well, if you think it, it is necessarily yours.
          > > How do you think someone else's thoughts?

          > Well then, how are Wil's thoughts not his own?

          Did you think you had cleverly cornered me?

          I believe that was exactly what I was suggesting. His ideas are his and he should stop blaming other people for them and be prepared to defend them. He is giving his ideas false glory and grandeur by attributing them to someone else who has a more respected name -- and dissuading argument. It's a sorta cheap trick. I don't care what he thinks Hegel might have said via his interpretation.

          If you are going to stand on the shoulder of gnats, you might as well go ahead and squash them.

          Mihaithoughtz Mihone









          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Mary
          Knott, I have no need to corner nor prove to be clever. Regardless of the interpretation I make, if I ve never thought about something until I ve read someone
          Message 4 of 24 , Apr 1, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Knott,

            I have no need to corner nor prove to be clever.

            Regardless of the interpretation I make, if I've never thought about something until I've read someone else's thought about it, I don't feel I should take credit for it.

            Mary

            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "fictiveparrot" <knott12@...> wrote:
            >
            > > > Well, if you think it, it is necessarily yours.
            > > > How do you think someone else's thoughts?
            >
            > > Well then, how are Wil's thoughts not his own?
            >
            > Did you think you had cleverly cornered me?
            >
            > I believe that was exactly what I was suggesting. His ideas are his and he should stop blaming other people for them and be prepared to defend them. He is giving his ideas false glory and grandeur by attributing them to someone else who has a more respected name -- and dissuading argument. It's a sorta cheap trick. I don't care what he thinks Hegel might have said via his interpretation.
            >
            > If you are going to stand on the shoulder of gnats, you might as well go ahead and squash them.
            >
            > Mihaithoughtz Mihone
            >
          • fictiveparrot
            ... You cannot think someone else s thoughts. What you can do in a fair sense is say when I was reading XYZ, it seemed to me that he was saying... but all
            Message 5 of 24 , Apr 1, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              > Regardless of the interpretation I make,
              > if I've never thought about something until
              > I've read someone else's thought about it,
              > I don't feel I should take credit for it.

              You cannot think someone else's thoughts. What you can do in a fair sense is say "when I was reading XYZ, it seemed to me that he was saying..." but all you are doing is apologizing for interpreting someone else's words -- i.e., having a thought.

              Thoughtless Monk
            • Jim
              Mary, Thank you for your reply. I have felt all along with our discussion of being and nothing that I have been intellectually at my limit. As Wil has said
              Message 6 of 24 , Apr 1, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Mary,

                Thank you for your reply.

                I have felt all along with our discussion of being and nothing that I have been intellectually at my limit. As Wil has said this topic is of the utmost difficulty, and at a certain depth understanding gives out for everyone.

                With regard to the current discussion with Knott, I very much agree with what you write:

                "Regardless of the interpretation I make, if I've never thought about something until I've read someone else's thought about it, I don't feel I should take credit for it."

                In fact honest philosophers and scientists always acknowledge in footnotes ideas which they have taken from other writers. And students have to acknowledge ideas they take from others, otherwise they can be charged with plagiarism. In Knott's world plagiarism could not exist, unless it was a case of just copying out the words of another thinker.

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