seeds wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 6:35 pm
That’s easy for an idealist to handle.
uwot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:27 pm
Well seeds, me old china, everything is easy for anyone who has all the answers.
Now, now, uwot (me old bean) there’s no need to be rude. We’re all just having a little fun here, sharing our delusions and flawed blatherings in this online virtual nuthouse.
Besides, if I had to preface everything I say in these threads with the Socratesian disclaimer of “btw, I know that I know nothing,” it would make my already too long posts even more tedious and ignorable than they already are.
seeds wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 6:35 pm
The idealist would simply state that mind is the arena (the living “emulsion,” so to speak) in which noumena and phenomena are suspended and perform their dance.
uwot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:27 pm
Really depends on the idealist.
I just figured that it would be a given that the idealist being referenced in my reply would be the one typing the reply.
uwot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:27 pm
Some will say there is no noumenon, it's all just phenomena. That's yer entry level idealist.
Care to provide a few notable (linkable) examples as to who those particular idealists might be?
uwot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:27 pm
Some theologians will claim ideas are in the mind of some god.
Yes, we’ve all heard of Bishop Berkeley. And, of course, you don’t need to be a theologian to see the logic in that particular line of reasoning.
uwot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:27 pm
Some scientists will claim there's some theoretically empirically verifiable cause of ideas other than the things which appear to be the source of the ideas - everything is a projection from the event horizon of a black hole springs to mind.
Yes, which is now leading to a greater interest in the possible holographic-like nature of reality, of which (as you know) I am a super fan.
uwot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:27 pm
I mean; how long ya got? Descartes was absolutely on the money when he said:
There is nothing so strange and so unbelievable that it has not been said by one philosopher or another.
Sounds a little like one of your other favorite “go to” quotes:
“Nothing is too ridiculous to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature...” Faraday
Was he talking about the “laws” that somehow magically came into existence via the blind and mindless meanderings of chance? (I’m sure that you know better than to get me started on that trail of rants.
)
In the meantime, so as not to derail this thread, how do you feel about bahman’s claim of there being no such thing as “emergence” in any form or context?
_______