A Philosophical Realist is an Empirical Idealist

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: A Philosophical Realist is an Empirical Idealist

Post by Terrapin Station »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:38 am
Terrapin Station wrote: Sun Feb 07, 2021 1:58 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sun Feb 07, 2021 5:28 am It is your discretion and mine as well.

My point is, don't use the term 'idealist' [often pejoratively by many] hastily when you do not understand its full implications within philosophy.
What are you basing your assessment of my understanding on?
You should have followed the link in the OP to note your following pejorative statement;
at page 74:
viewtopic.php?p=494542#p494542
Terrapin Station" wrote:Among other issues, idealists, who seem literally stuck in an infantile stage of development/understanding, conflate how we know something with what we know. What we know isn't the same thing as how we know it.
So in other words you took a comment that was a combination of a crack and a very specific point to be me thinking that I was saying something about "the full implications of idealism within philosophy"?
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Philosophical Realist is an Empirical Idealist

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Terrapin Station wrote: Mon Feb 08, 2021 1:38 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:38 am
Terrapin Station wrote: Sun Feb 07, 2021 1:58 pm
What are you basing your assessment of my understanding on?
You should have followed the link in the OP to note your following pejorative statement;
at page 74:
viewtopic.php?p=494542#p494542
Terrapin Station" wrote:Among other issues, idealists, who seem literally stuck in an infantile stage of development/understanding, conflate how we know something with what we know. What we know isn't the same thing as how we know it.
So in other words you took a comment that was a combination of a crack and a very specific point to be me thinking that I was saying something about "the full implications of idealism within philosophy"?
Generally, those [philosophical anti-realists] who apposed Philosophical Realism are categorized as 'idealists' and are normally condemned pejoratively, e.g. like your "infantile state of development".

My highlight is merely to represent the truth of the situation and the truth that when you put down anyone as 'idealist,' be reminded that you [as a realist] are also an idealist in another perspective.

Do you have any counter against the OP?
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: A Philosophical Realist is an Empirical Idealist

Post by Terrapin Station »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:44 am
Terrapin Station wrote: Mon Feb 08, 2021 1:38 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:38 am
You should have followed the link in the OP to note your following pejorative statement;
at page 74:
viewtopic.php?p=494542#p494542

So in other words you took a comment that was a combination of a crack and a very specific point to be me thinking that I was saying something about "the full implications of idealism within philosophy"?
Generally, those [philosophical anti-realists] who apposed Philosophical Realism are categorized as 'idealists' and are normally condemned pejoratively, e.g. like your "infantile state of development".

My highlight is merely to represent the truth of the situation and the truth that when you put down anyone as 'idealist,' be reminded that you [as a realist] are also an idealist in another perspective.

Do you have any counter against the OP?
What does your response here have to do with the question you're supposedly responding to?
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Philosophical Realist is an Empirical Idealist

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Flannel Jesus wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 8:39 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 3:51 am
Flannel Jesus wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 11:20 am I'm entirely unsurprised that you want to tie it into Eastern mysticism.
Btw, do you adopt Philosophical Realism? i.e.
  • Philosophical realism is usually not treated as a position of its own but as a stance towards other subject matters.
    [Philosophical ] Realism about a certain kind of thing (like numbers or morality) is the thesis that this kind of thing has mind-independent existence, i.e. that it is not just a mere appearance in the eye of the beholder.[1][2][3]
    This includes a number of positions within epistemology and metaphysics which express that a given thing instead exists independently of knowledge, thought, or understanding.

    Realism can also be a view about the properties of reality in general, holding that reality exists independent of the mind, as opposed to non-realist views (like some forms of skepticism and solipsism) which question the certainty of anything beyond one's own mind.

    Realism can also be a view about the properties of reality in general, holding that reality exists independent of the mind, as opposed to non-realist views (like some forms of skepticism and solipsism) which question the certainty of anything beyond one's own mind.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism
Of course I'm a realist. So are you.
Since you acknowledged you are a realist in response to that specific post, I presume you are a Philosophical Realist specifically and absolutely. That is the reason you DO NOT agree with the OP.

There are different types of realists from different realisms.

Yes, I am realist, i.e. an Empirical-Realist NOT a Philosophical-Realist [as defined above].

An Empirical Realist is one who believe that reality is connected directly with the empirical, i.e. whatever that is entangled with the human conditions.
Empirical realism” is a term coined by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). It is introduced and developed in Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (1781/1787). The doctrine serves as the capstone to Kant's epistemology as it applies to empirical reality.
It assigns an active role to the mind in the cognition of empirical objects while simultaneously endorsing the view that the existence of such objects is worthy of the “realist” designation.
In addition to epistemology, the doctrine has influence in the philosophy of science and implications for moral theory.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs ... .wbeos1626#:~
This mean that the empirical realist has the same beliefs as the Philosophical Realist except the empirical realist does not claim his realism is absolute but rather empirical realism is a subsumed [a subset of] within Transcendental Idealism.

Transcendental Idealism is basically a belief that all of reality is connected with the human conditions as in Kant's Copernican Revolution.

This mean that the empirical realist will believe 'there is a moon is if human one see it' but in a different paradigm as a Transcendental Idealist, he believe 'there is no moon if no human is looking at it".

As such an empirical realist will believe an oncoming train [half a mile away] on a track he is standing on exists as real empirically even he is facing his back to it [i.e. not looking at it], and he will jump off the rail track.

When you are a Philosophical Realist, you are not an empirical realist but rather an empirical Idealist.

Note this thread;
A Philosophical Realist is an Empirical Idealist
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=32009

Because you believe reality is independent of your human conditions, you are suffering from a Reality-Gap i.e. what is real out there is independent of yourself.
What is empirical to you is only effectively in your mind, i.e. idealism as defined, thus you are and empirical idealist.
This is why you insist, if your mind is not attending to [looking at] the moon, it still exists independently out there.

Even when we shift the paradigm to QM which is not conventional, you are still stuck with your philosophical realist paradigm.

Why you are sticking dogmatically to the philosophical realist paradigm should be a subject of interest for your further research.
Flannel Jesus
Posts: 2574
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2022 7:09 pm

Re: A Philosophical Realist is an Empirical Idealist

Post by Flannel Jesus »

I'm actually not being the dogmatic one between us two, believe it or not. Your position is:

Qm has exactly one interpretation of the moons existence when nobody is looking, and that is, it doesn't exist.

My position is:

Qm has more interpretations than that, and you should allow for the possibility of compatibility with the moon existing when nobody's looking with belief in qm.

I have provided a great many arguments for that being the case, and in no world is my position MORE dogmatic than your position, since my position allows for my interpretation and your interpretation and more, but your position allows for your interpretation only.

I just noticed that you posted this in a complete different thread, how awkward
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Philosophical Realist is an Empirical Idealist

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Flannel Jesus wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 4:54 am I'm actually not being the dogmatic one between us two, believe it or not. Your position is:

Qm has exactly one interpretation of the moons existence when nobody is looking, and that is, it doesn't exist.

My position is:

Qm has more interpretations than that, and you should allow for the possibility of compatibility with the moon existing when nobody's looking with belief in qm.

I have provided a great many arguments for that being the case, and in no world is my position MORE dogmatic than your position, since my position allows for my interpretation and your interpretation and more, but your position allows for your interpretation only.

I just noticed that you posted this in a complete different thread, how awkward
It is also very relevant to this thread.
I keep a record of all the threads I have raised, so I can make reference to them where necessary.

Wonder you get [not necessary agree with] my point?
A Philosophical Realist is an Empirical Idealist

Often a typical 'realist' [not you] will view an 'idealist' as a fool [note how Berkeley was treated by his opponents] not realizing they as [pseudo-realist] are also idealist in its respective context.
User avatar
Agent Smith
Posts: 1442
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm

Re: A Philosophical Realist is an Empirical Idealist

Post by Agent Smith »

Cool! 8)

"The Man! Watch, watch, he'll stand next to the parking meter, pull out a handkerchief, it's always blue, blow his nose into it and then ..."

"And then?"

"And then he'll whip out his wallet, it's in his right back pocket, always is, though he's a southpaw, he takes out 2 cents and drops it into that homeless guy's begging cup and then ..."

"And then?"

"He'll look to the left first then to the right and if the coast is clear, he'll cross the road and walk towards the old cemetery and then ..."

"And then?"

"And then ... and then ... I don't know."

"Wunderbar! He's doing exactly what you said he'll do! Go figure!"

"See! See!"

"Yes, yes, but as much as I hate being a killjoy, so what? Anybody could do what you just did and too, I've seen lucky guesses far more impressive!"

"Didn't you just say 'wunderbar'!?"

"Sure I did, but that was before I reailzed how simple it is!"

"I call him The Man!"

"And I call you The don't-waste-my-time man! Hehehe."

"Hahaha. Very funny! The Man, The Man, The Man, tralalala ..."

"Singing won't make the pain go away you know. Sorry I said that, but it's the truth! See ya!"

"The cemetery ... the old cemetery ... "
Post Reply