Philosophy Now Forum

Atla wrote 1. A general issue: It's not really a unity, but simply non-separation. There is no known separation in the universe: there is no known separation between the noumenal vase, between the noumenal vibrations that travel from the vase to the human, between the noumenal human senses, between...

Atla, wrote There is no knower-known duality so there is no relationship. Perhaps this is true, but start where everyday experience leaves off. There is a vase, here is my perceptual system. I know this vase in on the table, but in a philosophical analysis, what is this really about? What do you sa...

Advocate wrote The knower must have justified belief and that belief must be justified with a rational understanding of critical thinking. Sure, but this stands analysis. What is it to be justified? This is a question that goes to actual experience, as when I acknowledge that there is a tree in my ...

Advocate wrote You misunderstand how language works. Every word has a meaning. There are no exceptions. Knowledge claims are simply that which continues to be the case when validated. We Know about the world that which evidence gives us Reason to believe. There is no transcendent definition of know...

Atla wrote Or maybe you're just an idiot when it comes to psychology, like most people are, and can't figure out things on your own. I have all the reason to believe that I already went beyond your Kant and Heidegger. You would have been more believable if you actually could have pointed out someth...

Atla wrote Oh I remembered something aside from the nausea. After forcing myself to read a few more pages, I think Heidegger started talking about how in his phenomenology, the subject encounters objects, and we need to investigate the relationships between subject and objects. I was starting to ge...

Atla wrote I'm interested in PHILOSOPHY, which asks the big questions and is impersonal. Not interested in an obnoxious, whiney, self-important Nazi worshipper's personal philosophy, about how he wants to arrange his own mental content. Why the f should I care about that? Because being and Time has...

Atla wrote Well you guessed right. This may sound weird, but I literally got nausea from Being and Time after like 2 pages. Why can't he just accept that there is no basis for ontology, not even in phenomenology? WHY the mentally weak, self-important, pathetic navelgazing and whining whining whinin...

Atla wrote Instead they all seem to be in this limbo, where in some weird sense, they seem to think that their experience of the world is the same as the world. No, their experience of the world is their experience of the world, and it's impossible to get outside that, but it's just a part of the w...

Atla wrote Sorry I won't, I'm a nondualist and nothing you've said has changed my opinion that Kant and phenomenology didn't reach critical depth, and got lost in the end. I find this idealistic confusion about objects, being, presence, knowing, substance etc. unbearable. Seeing cognitive phantoms ...

Veritas Aequitas wrote The second, on the contrary, infinitely elevates my worth, as an intelligence, through my personality, in which the moral law reveals to me a life independent of animality and even of the entire world of the senses, at least so far as may be judged from the purposive determin...

Atla wrote Still don't know what point you're trying to make. Yes, this is roughly how knowledge is related to the world, therefore ________? One has to be interested. I look at the world of things and people around me and wonder at the very basic level about what is means to be a self, thrown into...

Atla wrote Look, I honestly don't know what point you are trying to make. Yes, every appearance we experience, everything we think, every model we posit about the world beyond appearances, is manufactured in our head, using our "a priori" cognitive makeup. It's just impossible to get outs...

Atla wrote Science explained the casual chain of percieving external objects very well, I assume that's not the issue. Simple, it's because experience is fundamental, and is the same as the "physical" world, including the external orange. So while "our" experience can be said to...

Atla wrote So then what's wrong with assuming this "objective" world independent of the human contribution? That's what I was saying all along, and rejecting VA's claim that everything is intertwined with the human conditions. It is a fair question, and thanks for not calling me any names...