Either
Re: Either
One never comes to regard the monstrous branches of an old oak, holding up its bunched leaves wildly, almost in a berserker fashion, without seeing something that could be cut down for wood chips. The so-called quality of the tree is the support for getting at the thing that can be actively used. It is the flowing of what is as what it is. One can always hold back what is, and split it into the symbol of the active parts, the curvature, extension, colours, abstract shapes and so on. The raw form of the shapes, in the same way, is the flow of the being that allows us to guard over what we are to actively make use of, or, say, climb, in the case of the noble oak.
-
- Posts: 4368
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Either
the thing in itself is unknowable
-Imp
-Imp
-
- Posts: 5621
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am
Re: Either
I don't understand how what you said is related to OP.Troll wrote: ↑Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:07 pm One never comes to regard the monstrous branches of an old oak, holding up its bunched leaves wildly, almost in a berserker fashion, without seeing something that could be cut down for wood chips. The so-called quality of the tree is the support for getting at the thing that can be actively used. It is the flowing of what is as what it is. One can always hold back what is, and split it into the symbol of the active parts, the curvature, extension, colours, abstract shapes and so on. The raw form of the shapes, in the same way, is the flow of the being that allows us to guard over what we are to actively make use of, or, say, climb, in the case of the noble oak.
Re: Either
Well, perhaps one day one finds an argument for this.
-
- Posts: 4368
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Either
Re: Either
"the thing in itself is unknowable" refutes itself.Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Apr 22, 2018 9:37 pmperhaps one day Kant would suggest it
-Imp
-
- Posts: 4368
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Either
actually, it doesn't
you have perceptions, nothing besides
are your perceptions of an external thing? prove it
-Imp
Re: Either
Nothing cannot affect you. Therefore there is something.Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Apr 22, 2018 11:21 pmactually, it doesn't
you have perceptions, nothing besides
are your perceptions of an external thing? prove it
-Imp
-
- Posts: 4368
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Either
all you have is the impression, that does not prove externality...bahman wrote: ↑Sun Apr 22, 2018 11:43 pmNothing cannot affect you. Therefore there is something.Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Apr 22, 2018 11:21 pmactually, it doesn't
you have perceptions, nothing besides
are your perceptions of an external thing? prove it
-Imp
-Imp
Re: Either
Do you believe that nothing can affect you?Impenitent wrote: ↑Mon Apr 23, 2018 1:43 amall you have is the impression, that does not prove externality...bahman wrote: ↑Sun Apr 22, 2018 11:43 pmNothing cannot affect you. Therefore there is something.Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Apr 22, 2018 11:21 pm
actually, it doesn't
you have perceptions, nothing besides
are your perceptions of an external thing? prove it
-Imp
-Imp
-
- Posts: 4368
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Either
"something" could be a hallucination...
-Imp
-
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm
Re: Either
Qualia is the consciousness' reaction to a sense but a sense is a frame of reference for reality. This is why we have senses. We need references to understand reality. Neither does matter create experience. But it is the referrent(s) for the senses.
-
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm
Re: Either
I didn't say that quite right. Let me restate the last two sentences. Events through the senses create experiences. Without events there won't be anything to experience and without senses there won't be any experiences to experience.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Mon Apr 23, 2018 10:33 pmQualia is the consciousness' reaction to a sense but a sense is a frame of reference for reality. This is why we have senses. We need references to understand reality. Neither does matter create experience. But it is the referrent(s) for the senses.