Why Thinking Is Over-rated

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

surreptitious57
Posts: 4257
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by surreptitious57 »

Understanding does not necessarily involve transforming the abstract into the concrete
Something can be understood at the conceptual level with no creation involved at all

Also some things that can be understood cannot be made concrete anyway
For example I + I = 2 is a statement that cannot be translated into reality
Because numbers only exist in the Platonic realm not the material one
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by Skepdick »

surreptitious57 wrote: Tue Jul 20, 2021 5:15 pm Understanding does not necessarily involve transforming the abstract into the concrete
Something can be understood at the conceptual level with no creation involved at all.
This notion of "understanding" is unfalsifiable. It's not even wrong.

What new information could possibly be brought to your attention in the future that would have you convinced your claim of "understanding" is wrong?
surreptitious57 wrote: Tue Jul 20, 2021 5:15 pm Also some things that can be understood cannot be made concrete anyway
For example I + I = 2 is a statement that cannot be translated into reality
Because numbers only exist in the Platonic realm not the material one
So where do the symbols "1", "+", "1", "=", "2" exist?

Looks like you just reified them.

Also. What do you think about 1+1=10 ?

If 1+1=10 is true, and 1+1=2 is true, doesn't it fthen ollow that 2=10?
surreptitious57
Posts: 4257
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by surreptitious57 »

The symbols of mathematics are not material
As they have no property or dimension but are purely conceptual
This is not only true for mathematics but for every language as well

I + I = I0 is not true in base I0 which is the standard base human beings use
And is why the standard number line only has I0 eternally reoccurring digits
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by simplicity »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Jul 20, 2021 4:33 pmWhen you utter the English sentence "I understand" you are making a claim about reality.
Here's the bottom-line...

One's intellect can only get you so far [practically speaking]. Just the same, it is [obviously] essential to carrying out every day activities. The better one can make use of what s/he can perceive/decipher will have a great deal to do with success in life, no doubt. My point is that one can go well beyond the limits of the intellect by "realizing" these limits through tapping into the non-intellectual. Once you are able to sense how tenuous our grip on reality is, your relationship with "other" will radically change.

All language is [at best] pointing towards the truth of the matter but nothing more. For many reasons, the human intellect is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantive way. Great teachers are such because they are able to simplify ideas, as moving toward decreasing complexity [in all things] is getting closer and closer to the truth...the limit being when all things converge to One.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by simplicity »

surreptitious57 wrote: Tue Jul 20, 2021 5:15 pmSomething can be understood at the conceptual level with no creation involved at all
Perhaps you mean that you can make an idea conform to some convention.

In that even the simplest thing has been brought into being by an infinite number of events preceding [and each of those events have been brought into being by an infinite number of events], it should be clear that understanding anything is quite impossible. When it comes to people, you can never understand why they do anything [and only have an extremely vague idea as to what they are doing].

Perhaps a better term might be that we "recognize" something.
Fja1
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2021 3:17 pm

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by Fja1 »

simplicity wrote: Tue Jul 20, 2021 4:31 pm
Fja1 wrote: Tue Jul 20, 2021 3:15 pm
simplicity wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 4:45 pmThe real world is even more complex than the intellectual world. That is why we are not omniscient, omnipotent or omnipresent. That is why we have that ideal - we want to be!
What is chance? Chance are results such that are unpredictable, because they depend on causes too numerous or complex to identify and analyze, despite determinism.
This was not my quote, but your reasoning would apply to all things. Things are the way they are for reasons nobody will ever know [and thank God for small favors!]. Imagine the brutality of our kind if we actually understood how things worked!! :twisted:
Whoops
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by Skepdick »

simplicity wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:39 am One's intellect can only get you so far [practically speaking]. Just the same, it is [obviously] essential to carrying out every day activities. The better one can make use of what s/he can perceive/decipher will have a great deal to do with success in life, no doubt. My point is that one can go well beyond the limits of the intellect by "realizing" these limits through tapping into the non-intellectual. Once you are able to sense how tenuous our grip on reality is, your relationship with "other" will radically change.
I agree. You are preaching to the choir. BUT there is an intellectual question hiding deep in your thesis.

What is the nature of relationships/relations? You start with the simplest of all relation: A relates to itself (identity).
You step up to a bit more complex relation: the relation between A and B.
And it only gets hellishly more complex after that: everything relates to everything.

In the abstract/intellectual space that is what Mathematicians study: relations.
simplicity wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:39 am All language is [at best] pointing towards the truth of the matter but nothing more.
Sure. One part of the journey is acquiring metalinguistic awareness. Using language - not being used by language.
simplicity wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:39 am For many reasons, the human intellect is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantive way.
There comes a point in physics where the only way to "understand" reality - to "understand" what fundamental particles are and how they interact, is to understand the Mathematics which describe their behaviour.

Language is our gateway to understanding. You really can't escape it.
simplicity wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:39 am Great teachers are such because they are able to simplify ideas, as moving toward decreasing complexity [in all things] is getting closer and closer to the truth...the limit being when all things converge to One.
All things converge to one perspective - sure. Your own perspective. Your own understanding. There are many possible understandings.

The relationship between all different understandings is all about translating from one language to another.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4257
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by surreptitious57 »

Everything is ultimately connected to everything else and so nothing can exist in a state of absolute isolation
Any state of isolation that therefore does exist is always going to be relative since it cannot be anything else

The human mind has no problem accessing reality because it is part of reality just like everything else is
All interpretations of reality are also part of reality even if they are false as nothing is outside of reality

Is reality really mathematical - no but mathematics is the language that is used to explain reality
Numbers are Platonic but reality is physical so they are not the same - the map is not the terrain
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by Skepdick »

surreptitious57 wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 10:29 am Numbers are Platonic but reality is physical so they are not the same - the map is not the terrain
Numbers don't exist. Quantities exist.

The distinction between numbers and quantities is the distinction between syntax and semantics.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4257
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by surreptitious57 »

Numbers may not exist physically but they do exist conceptually
As they are the concepts that are applied to physical quantities

All language is a conceptual representation of the physical
Without language complex communication is not possible
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by RCSaunders »

surreptitious57 wrote: Tue Jul 20, 2021 5:15 pm Understanding does not necessarily involve transforming the abstract into the concrete
Something can be understood at the conceptual level with no creation involved at all

Also some things that can be understood cannot be made concrete anyway
For example I + I = 2 is a statement that cannot be translated into reality
Because numbers only exist in the Platonic realm not the material one
What mystic nonsesne. Numbers do not exist at all independent of human consciousness. Mathematics is nothing more than a human invented method of describing and understand those aspects of reality which can be counted and measured. There are no wild, "numbers," floating around in some mystical Platonic space.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by RCSaunders »

surreptitious57 wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 3:36 pm Numbers may not exist physically but they do exist conceptually
As they are the concepts that are applied to physical quantities
That's right!
surreptitious57 wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 3:36 pm All language is a conceptual representation of the physical
Without language complex communication is not possible
That's right too except concepts are identifications of all existents, both physical and psychological (ideas, for example).
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by simplicity »

Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 7:52 am
simplicity wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:39 am One's intellect can only get you so far [practically speaking]. Just the same, it is [obviously] essential to carrying out every day activities. The better one can make use of what s/he can perceive/decipher will have a great deal to do with success in life, no doubt. My point is that one can go well beyond the limits of the intellect by "realizing" these limits through tapping into the non-intellectual. Once you are able to sense how tenuous our grip on reality is, your relationship with "other" will radically change.
Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 7:52 amI agree. You are preaching to the choir. BUT there is an intellectual question hiding deep in your thesis.

What is the nature of relationships/relations? You start with the simplest of all relation: A relates to itself (identity).
You step up to a bit more complex relation: the relation between A and B.
And it only gets hellishly more complex after that: everything relates to everything.

In the abstract/intellectual space that is what Mathematicians study: relations.
Allow me disclose that I have been a serious Zen student for several decades now. This might give you further insight into my point of departure.

I believe that the human intellect is much like a sense, say sight. Although we use our vision in many ways, nobody really knows what it is or how it is created [other the the commonly accepted physics/biochemistry/neurology, etc. non-sense. We simply accept it for what it is [because we have little alternative].

The intellect, though, is a subject of all kinds of speculation in all kinds of ways, from physiology to psychology. Again, this is all non-sense. We would be much better off accepting intelligence much as we accept vision, it just IS.
simplicity wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:39 am All language is [at best] pointing towards the truth of the matter but nothing more.
Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 7:52 amSure. One part of the journey is acquiring metalinguistic awareness. Using language - not being used by language.
Although language still stands as the most creative thing our species has accomplished, we hold this form of communication to be much more than it is, the same basic grunting and groaning that our ancestors put forth [only we believe that toning down the gruffness gives it more meaning]. Language has severe limits [especially when it must confront reality in any substantive way].
simplicity wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:39 am For many reasons, the human intellect is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantive way.
Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 7:52 amThere comes a point in physics where the only way to "understand" reality - to "understand" what fundamental particles are and how they interact, is to understand the Mathematics which describe their behaviour.

Language is our gateway to understanding. You really can't escape it.
Mathematics is a poor excuse for a language [language of science] which makes perfect sense because science is just the best guess at a particular time. The bar is pretty low, don't you think?
simplicity wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:39 am Great teachers are such because they are able to simplify ideas, as moving toward decreasing complexity [in all things] is getting closer and closer to the truth...the limit being when all things converge to One.
Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 7:52 amAll things converge to one perspective - sure. Your own perspective. Your own understanding. There are many possible understandings.
No, all things literally [and in every other way] converge to One. At this point, one's perspective ceases to exist.
Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 7:52 amThe relationship between all different understandings is all about translating from one language to another.
I would say that sums it up pretty well.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by Skepdick »

simplicity wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 8:20 pm Allow me disclose that I have been a serious Zen student for several decades now. This might give you further insight into my point of departure.

I believe that the human intellect is much like a sense, say sight. Although we use our vision in many ways, nobody really knows what it is or how it is created [other the the commonly accepted physics/biochemistry/neurology, etc. non-sense. We simply accept it for what it is [because we have little alternative].

The intellect, though, is a subject of all kinds of speculation in all kinds of ways, from physiology to psychology. Again, this is all non-sense. We would be much better off accepting intelligence much as we accept vision, it just IS.
I am on-board with all of that. Intellect is a faculty - an instrument.

I use mine for running thought-experiments. Simulations. Amongst other stuff.
simplicity wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 8:20 pm Although language still stands as the most creative thing our species has accomplished, we hold this form of communication to be much more than it is, the same basic grunting and groaning that our ancestors put forth [only we believe that toning down the gruffness gives it more meaning]. Language has severe limits [especially when it must confront reality in any substantive way].
It's an absolute evolutionary advantage. Memory is absolutely vital for learning from mistakes.

Spoken language allows memory-transfer between contemporaries.
Written language allows memory transfer between non-contemporaries.
Internet changed the game of memory-transfer even further.
simplicity wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 8:20 pm Mathematics is a poor excuse for a language [language of science] which makes perfect sense because science is just the best guess at a particular time. The bar is pretty low, don't you think?
Sure, but my point was that whatever it is we call "understanding" it is facilitated by Mathematics. We can't "understand" physics without it.
simplicity wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 8:20 pm converge to One. At this point, one's perspective ceases to exist.
Narratives converge. Actions converge. The convergence to One is the convergence to One's own perspective. And recognizing it.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Why Thinking Is Over-rated

Post by simplicity »

Skepdick wrote: Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:34 am
simplicity wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 8:20 pm converge to One. At this point, one's perspective ceases to exist.
Narratives converge. Actions converge. The convergence to One is the convergence to One's own perspective. And recognizing it.
Perhaps this is a conversation best had on another day, but the Eastern notion, "All is One," can be taken on many levels, including the literal. One's own perspective is one's thinking . "One" is a non-intellectual concept.

Consider the following...the physical Universe is set up [by convention] such that one's position within it determines distance/time from another object. Light emanating from said object can be seen by an observer at every time/distance interval.

If you had an infinite number of observers stretched out from 1 Angstrom unit [from the object] infinitely, each observer would be seeing the same thing at a different time. Therefore, the same event is taking place at over and over [it is only your relative distance from the object that is variable]. What does time mean in this instance?

This also takes place in our everyday life as the objects in our field of view exist in different times [dependent on distance]. How is it that we see all these objects at the same time, or is it that we are seeing all of these objects at different times?

It appears as if our brains have taken a reality which we could never comprehend and morphed it into something we try to make sense of but never can.
Post Reply