What is the use of self?

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by ken »

Ginkgo wrote:
bahman wrote: How that could be true? Materialism and dualism oppose each other.
ken wrote: They do NOT oppose each other, people just think they oppose each other. Just like creation and evolution, nature and nurture, et cetera, also do NOT oppose each other. What is found in both of them is truths and falsehoods. Looking at them both from a particular way allows the actual and real Truth to be seen and understood very easily and quickly. The reason why some people want to choose to believe one over the other is the same reason why they believe that there could only be one or the other and that they oppose each other.
The reason they oppose each other is because dualism claims mental events are not physical events. For example, in Descartes' dualism where the mind and body are seen to be made of different substances. Other dualist theories claim that mind and body are not identical. For example, property dualism makes the claim that physical substances contain a mental property and a physical property. On the other hand, materialism is a monist theory and claims the only thing that exist are physical things. In other words, all mental events are physical events. Mind and body is a single entity or part of a dual entity, it can't be both.
If as you allege they oppose each other, but neither of them is not fully correct, then that only supports EXACTLY what I have been saying. That is the Truth is held within both of them. Learning how to find, discover, see, and understand the Truth in ALL things, which by the way includes ALL the alleged opposing arguments like creation verses evolution, et cetera, is very simple and easy to do. But that is only if any person is really interested in this learning. The only reason there is apparently opposition is because human beings make opposing things, and this is solely because of how the brain works. Discover exactly how that works then there is NO opposition in Life. There is only Truth and falsehoods. Understanding how to very quickly, easily and simply distinguish between the two is done when knowing how the Mind and the brain actually work.
Ginkgo
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by Ginkgo »

ken wrote: If as you allege they oppose each other, but neither of them is not fully correct, then that only supports EXACTLY what I have been saying.
it is not an allegation, it is the cornerstone of philosophy of mind. Can you recount what you have been saying for my benefit?
Ken wrote: That is the Truth is held within both of them. Learning how to find, discover, see, and understand the Truth in ALL things, which by the way includes ALL the alleged opposing arguments like creation verses evolution, et cetera, is very simple and easy to do.
Can you explain to me how dualism and materialism are reconciled? If you can then the Nobel Prize is yours.
ken wrote: But that is only if any person is really interested in this learning. The only reason there is apparently opposition is because human beings make opposing things, and this is solely because of how the brain works. Discover exactly how that works then there is NO opposition in Life. There is only Truth and falsehoods. Understanding how to very quickly, easily and simply distinguish between the two is done when knowing how the Mind and the brain actually work.
How exactly does it work?
Last edited by Ginkgo on Tue Oct 04, 2016 10:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ginkgo
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by Ginkgo »

Justintruth wrote:The "self" - the idea of having "selves" is very useful and must be retained for a surprising reason.

It is because of the grammar of "second person" - or at least you can see it most clearly there.

So much of philosophy concentrates on clarifying first vs third person ontology. And indeed one must do that but the sheer effort that takes has obscured the second person and bogged us down in preliminaries.

The fact is we experience each other through third person experiences of matter. But we are "wired" to create representation in ourselves of more than the third person objective states of the "bodies" around us. The incarnation is of self in body is provided instinctively by biology as immediately evident. We instinctively experience in those terms. There are areas of the brain devoted to expressions, especially of face, and this gives us the means to represent second person states.

We know each other exist. No, it is not certain. But neither is third person - the brain in the vat - remember? But neither the brain in the vat or the fact that we experience - at least for now - em pathetically through apprehension of the others body prevents us from utilizing the fruits of second and third person "positing" in ontological terms that are immediate, and require no more technical philosophy than a baby has when it smiles and reaches out to touch its mother's face.

The realities of the "touch" or "caress" penetrate deeply and we are endowed in a rich life populated with billions of potential people with whom to have relationships.

There are also the communal modes of the "they" - the second person plural - as it functions in all kinds of parties, tribes, nations, etc. and how screwed up they get with nationalism having build doomsday machines complete with all the documented - pre-planned instructions present in the procedures of - for example the SIOP - the "Single Integrated Operations Plan" that documents exactly how to execute - step by step - button by button - keystroke by keystroke - the destruction of hundreds of millions of "selves".

Yes, we truly do need that concept. How we ever get philosophy off the ground in the West and helping enable some kind of aware knowledge of our destiny as a people becomes the question. Never was it more necessary for philosophy to advise the tyrant.

I appreciate the technical nature of the question but am frustrated that it has not already been answered in our culture. The psuedo - philosophers of naive materialism, the ignorance of conservative political thought, and the "despair" of Kierkegaard re-enforced by the nihilism of Nietzsche all have kept us pinned down like a Japanese carrier at the battle of Midway. The dive bombers are coming. Will we get our philosophy off the ground in time to enter the struggle for - yes - our "selves" - or will we enter the state popularized by images of the Borg or the Hive?

I encourage you to think plainly about these issues and recognize the very practical need for the notion of the self.

Nice post, I will do my best.
ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by ken »

Ginkgo wrote:
ken wrote: If as you allege they oppose each other, but neither of them is not fully correct, then that only supports EXACTLY what I have been saying.
it is not an allegation, it is the cornerstone of philosophy of mind. Can you recount what you have been saying for my benefit?
Absolutely everything is relative to the observer. When I observe what is written about materialism and what is written about dualism I see a consistent Truth within and between the two. I also observe and see falsehoods in both of them. When I separate the falsehoods in both of them I see how the truths in one substantiates the truths in the other to form one unified Truth. Through observations I also understand how human beings have come to write the two opposing views of materialism and dualism in the first place, and why some human beings continue to observe them as opposing points of view, as well as continually trying to hold onto seeing one of them as being right and the other wrong.

There is only one and only Truth, which exists in them both. One is consistent with the other, once you know how to look at them properly. The way to find and see this consistency that shows the one and only Truth in all the seemingly opposing points of views, like creation and evolution, et cetera, is extremely once you stop believing you already know what is right.

What I have been saying is if you look at any thing the wrong way, then you will not find and see the Truth of ALL things. Every thing is relative to the observer. So, if the Truth of ALL things is not being observed, seen, and understood, then the observer needs to change.
Ginkgo wrote:
Ken wrote: That is the Truth is held within both of them. Learning how to find, discover, see, and understand the Truth in ALL things, which by the way includes ALL the alleged opposing arguments like creation verses evolution, et cetera, is very simple and easy to do.
Can you explain to me how dualism and materialism are reconciled? If you can then the Nobel Prize is yours.
But I do not want nor need a nobel prize. I do not want any recognition for doing just what is right in Life and I certainly do not want any prize for just showing others what is true, right, and correct. The reward I get from watching ALL human beings living a truly meaningful and purposeful life together in peace is all I want.

To understand fully how dualism and materialism are fully reconciled is done during and in the process of learning how the Mind and the brain actually works. Obviously fully understanding how the Mind and the brain work reconciles dualism and materialism. So, yes I can explain to you how dualism and materialism are reconciled, but how much time are you willing to spend on just this topic? You also have to be prepared to understand a few other things, like learning how to be truly open and honest about your wrong doings, and be seriously wanting to change yourself, before you can even begin to understand how the Mind and the brain work.
Ginkgo wrote:
ken wrote: But that is only if any person is really interested in this learning. The only reason there is apparently opposition is because human beings make opposing things, and this is solely because of how the brain works. Discover exactly how that works then there is NO opposition in Life. There is only Truth and falsehoods. Understanding how to very quickly, easily and simply distinguish between the two is done when knowing how the Mind and the brain actually work.
How exactly does it work?
What is 'it'?

If 'it' is the Mind and the brain, then do you really think I could explain exactly how 'it' does work in a forum like this? Considering human beings have been around for few million or so years without ever coming close to some sort of consensus yet of this knowledge, do you think I could explain it in a relatively few short paragraphs here and now? The reason this knowledge has not yet been obtained by most people is because of the very reason of how the Mind and the brain actually work.

I am prepared to work with any human being if they are seriously interested in discovering this knowledge, in fact they can even take any stupid prize given out for this knowledge, if this knowledge is actually worthy of any "prize", and if they really only want to obtain knowledge in order to get a prize and recognition, but I need you firstly to be truly open and honest about your abusive behaviors of others and especially children, and seriously be wanting to change, not just for you but also for others, especially children. Finding people who want to learn and gain relatively new knowledge is not that difficult at all, but finding people who want to gain it for the right reasons and be absolutely truly open and honest is another matter. I have only found one human being so far who had been truly prepared for what is revealed with and with-in this knowledge.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by bahman »

ken wrote: Absolutely everything is relative to the observer. When I observe what is written about materialism and what is written about dualism I see a consistent Truth within and between the two. I also observe and see falsehoods in both of them. When I separate the falsehoods in both of them I see how the truths in one substantiates the truths in the other to form one unified Truth. Through observations I also understand how human beings have come to write the two opposing views of materialism and dualism in the first place, and why some human beings continue to observe them as opposing points of view, as well as continually trying to hold onto seeing one of them as being right and the other wrong.
I cannot imagine what you are proposing here.
Ginkgo
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by Ginkgo »

bahman wrote:
ken wrote: Absolutely everything is relative to the observer. When I observe what is written about materialism and what is written about dualism I see a consistent Truth within and between the two. I also observe and see falsehoods in both of them. When I separate the falsehoods in both of them I see how the truths in one substantiates the truths in the other to form one unified Truth. Through observations I also understand how human beings have come to write the two opposing views of materialism and dualism in the first place, and why some human beings continue to observe them as opposing points of view, as well as continually trying to hold onto seeing one of them as being right and the other wrong.
I cannot imagine what you are proposing here.

That makes two of us.
ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by ken »

bahman wrote:
ken wrote: Absolutely everything is relative to the observer. When I observe what is written about materialism and what is written about dualism I see a consistent Truth within and between the two. I also observe and see falsehoods in both of them. When I separate the falsehoods in both of them I see how the truths in one substantiates the truths in the other to form one unified Truth. Through observations I also understand how human beings have come to write the two opposing views of materialism and dualism in the first place, and why some human beings continue to observe them as opposing points of view, as well as continually trying to hold onto seeing one of them as being right and the other wrong.
I cannot imagine what you are proposing here.
Fair enough.

The reason you can not imagine is because you are looking at this from only the brain's perspective and what it has already grasped onto. That brain has no interest at all in what I am saying here, correct?

You just want to hold onto what you believe is correct already. You do not want to see anything other than what you already believe is true, am I right?
ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by ken »

Ginkgo wrote:
bahman wrote:
ken wrote: Absolutely everything is relative to the observer. When I observe what is written about materialism and what is written about dualism I see a consistent Truth within and between the two. I also observe and see falsehoods in both of them. When I separate the falsehoods in both of them I see how the truths in one substantiates the truths in the other to form one unified Truth. Through observations I also understand how human beings have come to write the two opposing views of materialism and dualism in the first place, and why some human beings continue to observe them as opposing points of view, as well as continually trying to hold onto seeing one of them as being right and the other wrong.
I cannot imagine what you are proposing here.

That makes two of us.
The complete lack of any clarification or questioning means that there is no inquisitiveness of wanting to imagine what I am saying here. That is completely understandable because that is exactly how the brain works. You read what I wrote from the brain only, and the brain's already grasped knowledge, which is believed is true, will not let you be open and imagine. Of course this will not be understood yet because you do not yet know how the Mind and the brain work, am I right?
Ginkgo
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by Ginkgo »

ken wrote:
Ginkgo wrote:
bahman wrote:
I cannot imagine what you are proposing here.

That makes two of us.
The complete lack of any clarification or questioning means that there is no inquisitiveness of wanting to imagine what I am saying here. That is completely understandable because that is exactly how the brain works. You read what I wrote from the brain only, and the brain's already grasped knowledge, which is believed is true, will not let you be open and imagine. Of course this will not be understood yet because you do not yet know how the Mind and the brain work, am I right?

Well, no you are not actually right, unless of course you can answer the following questions in relation to your previous responses

Ken wrote:
"Absolutely everything is relative to the observer. When I observe what is written about materialism and what is written about dualism I see a consistent truth with and between the two."

Please outline what is consistent in materialism and dualism.

Ken wrote:
"I also observe and see he falsehoods in both of then."

Please outline the falsehoods in dualism and materialism.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by attofishpi »

bahman wrote:What is the use of self?
..again .. the ability to eat and enjoy fish 'n chips.
ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by ken »

Ginkgo wrote:
ken wrote:
Ginkgo wrote:

That makes two of us.
The complete lack of any clarification or questioning means that there is no inquisitiveness of wanting to imagine what I am saying here. That is completely understandable because that is exactly how the brain works. You read what I wrote from the brain only, and the brain's already grasped knowledge, which is believed is true, will not let you be open and imagine. Of course this will not be understood yet because you do not yet know how the Mind and the brain work, am I right?

Well, no you are not actually right, unless of course you can answer the following questions in relation to your previous responses
What part exactly am I not right?

Do you know how the Mind and the brain work?

You certainly did not show any sign of inquisitiveness previously. That is until now, after I wrote what I did here. So what part of what I wrote was not right?
Ginkgo wrote:Ken wrote:
"Absolutely everything is relative to the observer. When I observe what is written about materialism and what is written about dualism I see a consistent truth with and between the two."

Please outline what is consistent in materialism and dualism.
If you want to provide an example/link of the two, then I will see if there is any other consistences in them. Until then they both talk about a body and a Mind.
Ginkgo wrote:Ken wrote:
"I also observe and see he falsehoods in both of then."

Please outline the falsehoods in dualism and materialism.
Again, provide an example or link of the two, then I will see if there is any falsehoods in those examples.

Also, remember neither dualism nor materialism on there own has brought anyone closer to a understanding. The Truths of Life are not found in either of them alone. The Truths of Life are found in the way a person looks, at them.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by bahman »

ken wrote:
bahman wrote:
ken wrote: Absolutely everything is relative to the observer. When I observe what is written about materialism and what is written about dualism I see a consistent Truth within and between the two. I also observe and see falsehoods in both of them. When I separate the falsehoods in both of them I see how the truths in one substantiates the truths in the other to form one unified Truth. Through observations I also understand how human beings have come to write the two opposing views of materialism and dualism in the first place, and why some human beings continue to observe them as opposing points of view, as well as continually trying to hold onto seeing one of them as being right and the other wrong.
I cannot imagine what you are proposing here.
Fair enough.

The reason you can not imagine is because you are looking at this from only the brain's perspective and what it has already grasped onto. That brain has no interest at all in what I am saying here, correct?

You just want to hold onto what you believe is correct already. You do not want to see anything other than what you already believe is true, am I right?
That is not correct. I really want to see what is the picture you are proposing since I have problem with those picture for a long time. Unfortunately you don't elaborate.
ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by ken »

bahman wrote:
ken wrote:
bahman wrote:
I cannot imagine what you are proposing here.
Fair enough.

The reason you can not imagine is because you are looking at this from only the brain's perspective and what it has already grasped onto. That brain has no interest at all in what I am saying here, correct?

You just want to hold onto what you believe is correct already. You do not want to see anything other than what you already believe is true, am I right?
That is not correct. I really want to see what is the picture you are proposing since I have problem with those picture for a long time. Unfortunately you don't elaborate.
More unfortunate is that you do not show any inquisitiveness.

Do you have any inquiringly questions?

What in particular do you want Me to elaborate on for you?

What is it you are not yet seeing and understanding?
Ginkgo
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by Ginkgo »

ken wrote:
Ginkgo wrote:
ken wrote:
The complete lack of any clarification or questioning means that there is no inquisitiveness of wanting to imagine what I am saying here. That is completely understandable because that is exactly how the brain works. You read what I wrote from the brain only, and the brain's already grasped knowledge, which is believed is true, will not let you be open and imagine. Of course this will not be understood yet because you do not yet know how the Mind and the brain work, am I right?

Well, no you are not actually right, unless of course you can answer the following questions in relation to your previous responses
What part exactly am I not right?

Do you know how the Mind and the brain work?

You certainly did not show any sign of inquisitiveness previously. That is until now, after I wrote what I did here. So what part of what I wrote was not right?
Ginkgo wrote:Ken wrote:
"Absolutely everything is relative to the observer. When I observe what is written about materialism and what is written about dualism I see a consistent truth with and between the two."

Please outline what is consistent in materialism and dualism.
If you want to provide an example/link of the two, then I will see if there is any other consistences in them. Until then they both talk about a body and a Mind.
Ginkgo wrote:Ken wrote:
"I also observe and see he falsehoods in both of then."

Please outline the falsehoods in dualism and materialism.
Again, provide an example or link of the two, then I will see if there is any falsehoods in those examples.

Also, remember neither dualism nor materialism on there own has brought anyone closer to a understanding. The Truths of Life are not found in either of them alone. The Truths of Life are found in the way a person looks, at them.
http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/36606-the-consc ... xperience/\


Above I have provide a link for your perusal. In broad terms Chalmers is a dualist and Prinz is a materialist. Please elaborate on what is true or false in this article.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is the use of self?

Post by bahman »

ken wrote: More unfortunate is that you do not show any inquisitiveness.

Do you have any inquiringly questions?

What in particular do you want Me to elaborate on for you?

What is it you are not yet seeing and understanding?
To my understanding both materialism and dualism have their own issues. Materialism has issue to explain how consciousness and self arises from brain activities. We have two substances in dualism and each are responsible for some activities. Body allows us to move around, grasp things, receive sensory data, etc. The soul in another hand allows us to experience and have a sense of self. Dualism however have interaction problem. In your post you mentioned "Absolutely everything is relative to the observer. When I observe what is written about materialism and what is written about dualism I see a consistent Truth within and between the two.". I understand that materialism and dualism can each explain a part of problem we are facing but I don't understand how we are allowed to consider or possibly can construct a combine model to explain reality so I would be have happy if you elaborate on this issues.
Post Reply