ontology is epistemology

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

ontology is epistemology

Post by Advocate »

Existence is an epistemological term meaning a thing which is known - has external correlation or logical necessity. If there is evidence for it, it exists. Whether internally or both internally and externally is a separate question.
popeye1945
Posts: 2130
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am

Re: ontology is epistemology

Post by popeye1945 »

Advocate wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 5:25 pm Existence is an epistemological term meaning a thing which is known - has external correlation or logical necessity. If there is evidence for it, it exists. Whether internally or both internally and externally is a separate question.
Knowing certainly is epistemological in nature and it is the only way we come to know the world through the physical world's making its effects known by the changes it makes to our biology. As Spinoza stated the body is the mind's idea and it is our interface with ultimate reality. Ultimate reality is to be known only as apparent reality due to the fact that apparent reality is a biological readout. It is a readout of those aspects of ultimate reality that we are capable of sensing, and this is most definitely the ontological aspect. Existence is biologically dependent for the reasons stated above, for existence known cognitively is the only existence that can be known. The existence of things is limited by a biology where its senses while inableing are also limiting only part of ultimate reality is know to us as how it effects our bodies. The statement title, "Ontology is Epistemology", is just another way of saying apparent reality is biological dependent.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6668
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: ontology is epistemology

Post by Iwannaplato »

Advocate wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 5:25 pm Existence is an epistemological term meaning a thing which is known - has external correlation or logical necessity. If there is evidence for it, it exists. Whether internally or both internally and externally is a separate question.
If you make a claim that something exists, then generally it means something that is known or known by you or at least experienced by you. But if some refers to existence that does not mean, necessarily, only those things that have evidence that they exist. I think most of us think that there are things that exist that we cannot, now, or perhaps ever, demonstrate exist. I would never refer to existence as only that which I can prove to others exists via evidence. Nor do I assume that the only things that exist are things I can prove exist. So, I don't think that's what the word means. In certain contexts, where people are making claims and the context has some sort of contracted or socially expected guideline that one should not say X exists unless one can demonstrate it, ok.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: ontology is epistemology

Post by Advocate »

[quote=popeye1945 post_id=571656 time=1652085064 user_id=21999]
[quote=Advocate post_id=567611 time=1649607944 user_id=15238]
Existence is an epistemological term meaning a thing which is known - has external correlation or logical necessity. If there is evidence for it, it exists. Whether internally or both internally and externally is a separate question.
[/quote]

Knowing certainly is epistemological in nature and it is the only way we come to know the world through the physical world's making its effects known by the changes it makes to our biology. As Spinoza stated the body is the mind's idea and it is our interface with ultimate reality. Ultimate reality is to be known only as apparent reality due to the fact that apparent reality is a biological readout. It is a readout of those aspects of ultimate reality that we are capable of sensing, and this is most definitely the ontological aspect. Existence is biologically dependent for the reasons stated above, for existence known cognitively is the only existence that can be known. The existence of things is limited by a biology where its senses while inableing are also limiting only part of ultimate reality is know to us as how it effects our bodies. The statement title, "Ontology is Epistemology", is just another way of saying apparent reality is biological dependent.
[/quote]

Reality-to-us is clearly biological because we are biologicals embodied. But other systems can "know" external reality without having biology, and biological creatures can know it without appeal to biology other than incidentally. Merely because all currently known examples of mind are biological doesn't imply that minds can only be biological or that physical senses are the only meaningful way to gather information. Let's say someone has a memory implant chip, for instance - not an unlikely technical problem. They could accept memories from a GoPro. The biological aspect of humanity is incidental to the inner experience except in that the particular mechanisms of biology happen to be a certain kind of filter on our experience Of.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: ontology is epistemology

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Iwannaplato post_id=571707 time=1652092333 user_id=3619]
[quote=Advocate post_id=567611 time=1649607944 user_id=15238]
Existence is an epistemological term meaning a thing which is known - has external correlation or logical necessity. If there is evidence for it, it exists. Whether internally or both internally and externally is a separate question.
[/quote]If you make a claim that something exists, then generally it means something that is known or known by you or at least experienced by you. But if some refers to existence that does not mean, necessarily, only those things that have evidence that they exist. I think most of us think that there are things that exist that we cannot, now, or perhaps ever, demonstrate exist. I would never refer to existence as only that which I can prove to others exists via evidence. Nor do I assume that the only things that exist are things I can prove exist. So, I don't think that's what the word means. In certain contexts, where people are making claims and the context has some sort of contracted or socially expected guideline that one should not say X exists unless one can demonstrate it, ok.
[/quote]

Everything that is thought of exists as a pattern in a mind. Whether it has an external correlate is a separate question and can be materially validated or not.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6668
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: ontology is epistemology

Post by Iwannaplato »

Advocate wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 2:31 pm Everything that is thought of exists as a pattern in a mind. Whether it has an external correlate is a separate question and can be materially validated or not.
Everything that is thought might existspattern in the mind, but not everything that is thought of.....though I suppose this is fussy, but the preposition is about objective correlates, there. But I wasn't denying the existence of thoughts, whatever they are or are of. I was suggesting something different, and that had to do with correlates and their existence. I took no stand on the reality of thoughts or thoughts of.

As an aside, I don't understand why your quote function does not work. I copied the first part of your post and previewed it. Thinking I could help you get your quotes right. But it came up just peachy. You'd made no mistake. Since it doesn't work, for you, it means when you quote us, it doesn't show up, so I thought I'd help. But it seems there is nothing to do. Which is odd.
popeye1945
Posts: 2130
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am

Re: ontology is epistemology

Post by popeye1945 »

]
Advocate wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 5:25 pm Existence is an epistemological term meaning a thing which is known - has external correlation or logical necessity. If there is evidence for it, it exists. Whether internally or both internally and externally is a separate question. Reality-to-us is clearly biological because we are biologicals embodied. But other systems can "know" external reality without having biology, and biological creatures can know it without appeal to biology other than incidentally. Merely because all currently known examples of mind are biological doesn't imply that minds can only be biological or that physical senses are the only meaningful way to gather information. Let's say someone has a memory implant chip, for instance - not an unlikely technical problem. They could accept memories from a GoPro. The biological aspect of humanity is incidental to the inner experience except in that the particular mechanisms of biology happen to be a certain kind of filter on our experience Of.

Advocate.

Only a conscious subject can know and yes its knowing depends upon there being something to know, like the physical world. Existence is relative to biological life, things are the affected changes in the body of biological life, a readout if you like of experiences of the body. The reason I say this is that the science of physics states that ultimate reality is a place of no things, just different wave frequencies, not anyone's idea of reality. Your going to have to make your position clearer than it is, what other systems other than biological systems can know anything. Your really into making baseless statements here, there is nothing which can know other than a biological entity, a computer chip you say to enhance biological function maybe, but it is only through the experience of the body that we know anything. I can understand aids to biological experience, modern physics uses such technology at present, but, they must ultimately to be understood by a conscious subject. These technologies are just giving us greater access to what is considered ultimate reality as apposed to apparent reality which again is a biological readout.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: ontology is epistemology

Post by Advocate »

[quote=popeye1945 post_id=571754 time=1652108323 user_id=21999]
]
[quote=Advocate post_id=567611 time=1649607944 user_id=15238]
Existence is an epistemological term meaning a thing which is known - has external correlation or logical necessity. If there is evidence for it, it exists. Whether internally or both internally and externally is a separate question. Reality-to-us is clearly biological because we are biologicals embodied. But other systems can "know" external reality without having biology, and biological creatures can know it without appeal to biology other than incidentally. Merely because all currently known examples of mind are biological doesn't imply that minds can only be biological or that physical senses are the only meaningful way to gather information. Let's say someone has a memory implant chip, for instance - not an unlikely technical problem. They could accept memories from a GoPro. The biological aspect of humanity is incidental to the inner experience except in that the particular mechanisms of biology happen to be a certain kind of filter on our experience Of.
[/quote]


Advocate.

Only a conscious subject can know and yes its knowing depends upon there being something to know, like the physical world. Existence is relative to biological life, things are the affected changes in the body of biological life, a readout if you like of experiences of the body. The reason I say this is that the science of physics states that ultimate reality is a place of no things, just different wave frequencies, not anyone's idea of reality. Your going to have to make your position clearer than it is, what other systems other than biological systems can know anything. Your really into making baseless statements here, there is nothing which can know other than a biological entity, a computer chip you say to enhance biological function maybe, but it is only through the experience of the body that we know anything. I can understand aids to biological experience, modern physics uses such technology at present, but, they must ultimately to be understood by a conscious subject. These technologies are just giving us greater access to what is considered ultimate reality as apposed to apparent reality which again is a biological readout.
[/quote]

In simplest terms, evolutionary complexity leading to cognition need not be only biological, so knowledge need not be, despite that it seems to always have been so far. The pattern commonly understood as cognition, in which knowledge is relevant, isn't *inherently* biological, and any advanced being of sufficient complexity would evolve an identical function, regardless of substrate. Knowledge is independent of biology. Justified belief makes sense in other contexts.

The fact that so known instances of consciousness so far have been biologically embodied is sufficient to say consciousness is a biological phenomenon. When you introduce non-biological components, the system isn't the same kind of system. It will change differently at minimum, and that butterfly effect means the implications are entirely different and you'll need to update vocabulary. Likewise whatever an octopus experiences, or an alien, etc. They are not insubstantial distinctions and must not be conflated.
Last edited by Advocate on Sun Apr 30, 2023 6:58 pm, edited 3 times in total.
popeye1945
Posts: 2130
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am

Re: ontology is epistemology

Post by popeye1945 »

There is only one other source of knowledge besides personal experience and that is what is trusted as knowledge by other conscious subjects through a secondary source, for example reading and educational indoctrination. Experience is knowledge to the individual and agreement to the group/society. Perception is always true to its biology even where it disagrees with physical reality.
godelian
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed May 04, 2022 4:21 am

Re: ontology is epistemology

Post by godelian »

A set of logic sentences can be defined a membership function.

Such membership function inspects the source code of a logic sentence and decides if it belongs to the set, yes or no.

Example. The set of all blue balls. The membership function inspects if the object is a ball and if it is blue. If yes, then the ball is a member of the set.

If this membership function only accepts logic sentences that can be justified in a particular way, then the ontology of this set is its epistemology.

Examples.

Every logic sentence that can be justified with an experimental test report, is a member of the set called "science".

Every logic sentence that can be proven from a formal axiomatic system, is a member of the set called "mathematics".

Since a set is definable by its membership function, and since a membership function can discriminate on the basis of the availability of justification, the ontology of such set necessarily coincides with its epistemology.

So yes, the ontology of an epistemic set is simply its epistemology.
popeye1945
Posts: 2130
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am

Re: ontology is epistemology

Post by popeye1945 »

Advocate wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 2:29 pm
popeye1945 wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 9:31 am
Advocate wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 5:25 pm Existence is an epistemological term meaning a thing which is known - has external correlation or logical necessity. If there is evidence for it, it exists. Whether internally or both internally and externally is a separate question.
Knowing certainly is epistemological in nature and it is the only way we come to know the world through the physical world's making its effects known by the changes it makes to our biology. As Spinoza stated the body is the mind's idea and it is our interface with ultimate reality. Ultimate reality is to be known only as apparent reality due to the fact that apparent reality is a biological readout. It is a readout of those aspects of ultimate reality that we are capable of sensing, and this is most definitely the ontological aspect. Existence is biologically dependent for the reasons stated above, for existence known cognitively is the only existence that can be known. The existence of things is limited by a biology where its senses while inableing are also limiting only part of ultimate reality is know to us as how it effects our bodies. The statement title, "Ontology is Epistemology", is just another way of saying apparent reality is biological dependent.
Reality-to-us is clearly biological because we are biologicals embodied. But other systems can "know" external reality without having biology, and biological creatures can know it without appeal to biology other than incidentally. Merely because all currently known examples of mind are biological doesn't imply that minds can only be biological or that physical senses are the only meaningful way to gather information. Let's say someone has a memory implant chip, for instance - not an unlikely technical problem. They could accept memories from a GoPro. The biological aspect of humanity is incidental to the inner experience except in that the particular mechanisms of biology happen to be a certain kind of filter on our experience Of.
Advocate,

It is true humanity has devised instruments to measure and seek out what is not available to our senses, this is stepping out of the confines of our biology but only marginally, for these instruments and their results must ultimately be interpreted again by human biology. An implanted chip if it becomes reality will of necessity be subject to the same limitations. An object is an object because biology is biology, biology is the meaning and the measure of all things.
Post Reply