What do you think I think it is?
epistemology is
Re: epistemology is
[quote=Skepdick post_id=493850 time=1612205179 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493849 time=1612205157 user_id=15238]
That is not subject to refutation but it might not be at all what you think it is.
[/quote]
What do you think I think it is?
[/quote]
<shrug> doesn't matter.
There's no purpose i can think of for that information to be either useful or interesting. I assume that you, like all the other apparent others, start from a similar psychological framework because it is deeply biologically entrenched. I assume your limit of selfhood is similar to mine for all the similar reasons. And since my experience of others is that they tend to act as though those things were true almost exclusively, that's good enough for all intents and purposes to not care if there's any potential discrepancy. You're getting into the minutiae of irrelevancies.
[quote=Advocate post_id=493849 time=1612205157 user_id=15238]
That is not subject to refutation but it might not be at all what you think it is.
[/quote]
What do you think I think it is?
[/quote]
<shrug> doesn't matter.
There's no purpose i can think of for that information to be either useful or interesting. I assume that you, like all the other apparent others, start from a similar psychological framework because it is deeply biologically entrenched. I assume your limit of selfhood is similar to mine for all the similar reasons. And since my experience of others is that they tend to act as though those things were true almost exclusively, that's good enough for all intents and purposes to not care if there's any potential discrepancy. You're getting into the minutiae of irrelevancies.
How do you know?
How do we know...
is entirely contingent. Different intended outcomes require different levels of certainty, provided by different varieties of evidence. You cannot start with the question, you have to start with "in order to x..."
is entirely contingent. Different intended outcomes require different levels of certainty, provided by different varieties of evidence. You cannot start with the question, you have to start with "in order to x..."
Re: epistemology is
What is your experience of selfhood?Advocate wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 7:50 pm There's no purpose i can think of for that information to be either useful or interesting. I assume that you, like all the other apparent others, start from a similar psychological framework because it is deeply biologically entrenched. I assume your limit of selfhood is similar to mine for all the similar reasons.
What do you refer to when you use the word "I" ?
What's your relevance filter?Advocate wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 7:50 pm And since my experience of others is that they tend to act as though those things were true almost exclusively, that's good enough for all intents and purposes to not care if there's any potential discrepancy. You're getting into the minutiae of irrelevancies.
Re: epistemology is
>What is your experience of selfhood?
>What do you refer to when you use the word "I" ?
I can find no meaningful distinction (other than barely semantic ones) between self, consciousness, awareness, ego, perspective, experience, i, qualia, etc. They are almost always interchangeable, with the exception of sentient which can be used to distinguish between lesser and more complex creatures.
>What's your relevance filter?
That's subconscious stuff. And empirical because relevance filters are at that low, more universal level. You'll have to ask psychology or neuroscience. Leaving aside the whole free will thing, basic avoid/approach (aka relevance filtering as i interpret the question) happens deep in the lizard mind, not even the monkey mind, and only in very slow circumstances does our active attention get involved.
>What do you refer to when you use the word "I" ?
I can find no meaningful distinction (other than barely semantic ones) between self, consciousness, awareness, ego, perspective, experience, i, qualia, etc. They are almost always interchangeable, with the exception of sentient which can be used to distinguish between lesser and more complex creatures.
>What's your relevance filter?
That's subconscious stuff. And empirical because relevance filters are at that low, more universal level. You'll have to ask psychology or neuroscience. Leaving aside the whole free will thing, basic avoid/approach (aka relevance filtering as i interpret the question) happens deep in the lizard mind, not even the monkey mind, and only in very slow circumstances does our active attention get involved.
Re: How do you know?
[quote=Skepdick post_id=493857 time=1612205669 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493855 time=1612205581 user_id=15238]
You cannot start with the question, you have to start with "in order to x..."
[/quote]
How can you make any claims/propositions without first having obtained some knowledge?
How can you obtain any knowledge without first asking questions?
[/quote]
Experience itself provides replicative empirical certainty. If it didn't we couldn't do anything. Also we wouldn't have been able to evolve.
[quote=Advocate post_id=493855 time=1612205581 user_id=15238]
You cannot start with the question, you have to start with "in order to x..."
[/quote]
How can you make any claims/propositions without first having obtained some knowledge?
How can you obtain any knowledge without first asking questions?
[/quote]
Experience itself provides replicative empirical certainty. If it didn't we couldn't do anything. Also we wouldn't have been able to evolve.
Re: epistemology is
I am not asking you about any of those things.Advocate wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 8:01 pm I can find no meaningful distinction (other than barely semantic ones) between self, consciousness, awareness, ego, perspective, experience, i, qualia, etc. They are almost always interchangeable, with the exception of sentient which can be used to distinguish between lesser and more complex creatures.
What is your experience of "I" ?
What could they possibly tell me about "I" ?
Re: How do you know?
[quote=Skepdick post_id=493864 time=1612206931 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493861 time=1612206166 user_id=15238]
Experience itself provides replicative empirical certainty.
[/quote]
What is your "experience itself" of the "I" ?
What do you know about it?
[/quote]
Trololol
[quote=Advocate post_id=493861 time=1612206166 user_id=15238]
Experience itself provides replicative empirical certainty.
[/quote]
What is your "experience itself" of the "I" ?
What do you know about it?
[/quote]
Trololol
Re: How do you know?
Then stop trolling. Tell me something about the "I".
Do you not know ANYTHING about self-reference?!?!
What ARE "you" ? Surely you have a theory of self?
If you can't even tell me anything about the thing you are "most certain about" why should anybody listen to you about anything else?
Know thyself and all that jazz.
Re: How do you know?
[quote=Skepdick post_id=493866 time=1612207214 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493865 time=1612207032 user_id=15238]
Trololol
[/quote]
Then stop trolling. Tell me something about the "I".
Do you not know ANYTHING about self-reference?!?!
What ARE "you" ? Surely you have a theory of self?
If you can't even tell me anything about the thing you are "most certain about" why should anybody listen to you about anything else?
Know thyself and all that jazz.
[/quote]
I already addressed all of that in excruciating detail, so it's unfortunate you do not understand.
[quote=Advocate post_id=493865 time=1612207032 user_id=15238]
Trololol
[/quote]
Then stop trolling. Tell me something about the "I".
Do you not know ANYTHING about self-reference?!?!
What ARE "you" ? Surely you have a theory of self?
If you can't even tell me anything about the thing you are "most certain about" why should anybody listen to you about anything else?
Know thyself and all that jazz.
[/quote]
I already addressed all of that in excruciating detail, so it's unfortunate you do not understand.
Re: How do you know?
You have said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the self and self-reference.
You did say the universe is recursive, but I think you are trapped in a mind projection fallacy
Re: How do you know?
[quote=Skepdick post_id=493878 time=1612212238 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493876 time=1612211328 user_id=15238]
I already addressed all of that in excruciating detail, so it's unfortunate you do not understand.
[/quote]
You have said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the self and self-reference.
[/quote]
I said, and i quote: "There's no pragmatic difference between this long list of shit."
If you understand those ideas, look to the center of them. That's my theory.
[quote=Advocate post_id=493876 time=1612211328 user_id=15238]
I already addressed all of that in excruciating detail, so it's unfortunate you do not understand.
[/quote]
You have said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the self and self-reference.
[/quote]
I said, and i quote: "There's no pragmatic difference between this long list of shit."
If you understand those ideas, look to the center of them. That's my theory.
Re: How do you know?
I am looking to the center of them.
I am at always at the center.
Why can't you tell me anything about this incessantly-prevalent self-reference?
It makes all the pragmatic difference in the world to a computer scientist.