creativesoul wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:08 am
It is impossible to do without language, and that is quite simply not something that is up to either one of us. We do not determine that. It's a matter of existential dependency. Thinking about one's own thought/belief requires having thought/belief
and the capability to isolate and subsequently take an account of it as it's own subject of consideration. Taking an account of it requires a proxy. We use all sorts of different terms to name different mental ongoings.
It is possible. This is what phenomenologists do. The process is called bracketing (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracketin ... omenology) ).
Part and parcel for why I thought I had Aspergers. I am an autodidact and I spent far too much time learning through applied phenomenology (which is intuitive to me) in isolation from the regular "institutions of learning" without giving any of my thoughts any names/labels.
They just existed as thoughts and any language/labels I developed for my mental constructs are my own. It is when I tried to communicate my ideas with others is when I discovered that nobody can understand me. And what puzzled them even more is how somebody "so stupid that he can't even speak" be so effective in solving problems.
In fact I only learned the common label (phenomenology) in my late 20s. And the whole "holy shit - this is what I have been doing! I thought I was special!" thing happened. So I was forced to learn the "common language" out of necessity for communication.
creativesoul wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:08 am
A language-less creature can draw correlations between different things. Each and every one of those things must exist in it's entirety prior to becoming part of the creature's correlation(thought/belief). If the creature has no way to name and/or otherwise isolate it's own thought/belief, then it cannot possibly be thinking about it.
I am sorry, but you are arguing for logocentrism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logocentrism
Knowing that this is not the path I walked - I vehemently disagree with it
creativesoul wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:08 am
To think/believe requires drawing correlations. The content of thought/belief is equivalent to the content of the creature's correlations. The content of all thought/belief is correlation. To think about one's own thought/belief is to consider it as it's own subject matter.
Correct. And correlations do not require language. Only indexing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_indexing and pointers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointer_( ... ogramming)
Of course - I learned to program in 6502 assembly and BASIC at the age of 5. So you could say that I had a "language" to think about these things.
creativesoul wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:08 am
TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 10:02 pm
creativesoul wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 10:24 pm
Yes, like Santa Claus. Santa existed in it's entirety prior to you thinking about Santa.
This is trivial to falsify. I am thinking about tomorrow now...
Your thoughts of tomorrow now are not tomorrow.
You'll have to do better than this.
Non-sequitur.
My thoughts of Santa were not Santa either, so you have clearly shifted the goalposts here.
I am thinking of tomorrow BEFORE tomorrow "exists in its entirety".