Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:24 am
nemos wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 12:33 am
Objectivity is composed of electrical signals delivered to us by our sense organs. If you have another way to receive information from the "outside", then I can only be happy for you.
If your above is qualified only to common sense, then I can agree with you.
But from a philosophical perspective, common sense or even conventional sense are insufficient to represent what is efficiently real.
Within common sense, there are mind-independent external independent objects out there but to insist upon such a claim as absolutely-real cannot be realistic.
To insist external objects are absolutely objective and real is delusional because external objects are tentative, transitional, impermanent and illusory.
As Russell had asserted "even when one is looking at a table, perhaps there is no Table at ALL?"
Well if one wants to 'doubt' whether the 'thing', which one is actually 'looking at' is even 'there', or not, 'in sight', then that one would be better off getting there 'eyes checked' I would recommend.
Now, of course, if the 'thing' one is 'looking at' is still in the exact same form, shape, and way, then obviously not. And, this irrefutable Fact applies to absolutely every thing that is being 'looked at', and 'seen'. But, this is just because of the duration between what is 'seen' or 'recognized' and what was being 'looked at'.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:24 am
Russell wrote:Among these surprising possibilities, doubt suggests that perhaps there is no table at all.
Such questions are bewildering, and it is difficult to know that even the strangest hypotheses may not be true. Thus our familiar table, which has roused but the slightest thoughts in us hitherto, has become a problem full of surprising possibilities. The one thing we know about it is that it is not what it seems. Beyond this modest result, so far, we have the most complete liberty of conjecture. Leibniz tells us it is a community of souls: Berkeley tells us it is an idea in the mind of God; sober science, scarcely less wonderful, tells us it is a vast collection of electric charges in violent motion.
Problems of Philosophy
1. If one 'doubts' too much, then 'doubt' itself can also lead one astray.
2. No actual question was posed, nor even asked, here. So, what is the 'such questions', which this one is referring to, exactly?
3. But it is very simple and very easy to know if the strangest hypotheses are true or not. In Fact when one is just 'looking at', and 'seeing' things for what they really are, then knowing what the actual Truth is, exactly, is a very simple and very easy thing to do, and which happens almost instantaneously as well. As I keep saying and claiming, and which I am still waiting for absolutely anyone to question and/or challenge me on.
4. What is this alleged 'problem full of surprising possibilities', exactly? Obviously, we can only solve and/or answer 'them' if and when 'they' are presented.
5. Why, what does 'it/the table' 'seem' like?
6. As for the rest here what is the 'it' word referring to, exactly?
7. There are no actual 'problems' of 'philosophy'. But, then again, I use those two words in a way that fits in, perfectly, with all other words.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:24 am
Take the stars you see in the night sky.
Okay.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:24 am
Yes, they are from electrical signals that are delivered to us by our sense organs from billion of light years ago.
What is the 'they' word here referring to, exactly?
Did you purposely write the numbers '2023' here?
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:24 am
that star [electronic waves triggered in your mind]
1. you do not have a mind.
2. There is no such thing as 'your mind'.
3. Therefore, what you say and claim here is just plain old False and Wrong.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:24 am
could not existed at all at present, i.e. already have exploded or collapse into nothing.
How do you know this?
Some stars are only a few light years away, from 'you', at any given moment, so why would they have already exploded, or collapsed, before their light reaches 'you'?
Also, how do you know what happens 'in the future' to the things that you are 'looking at' and 'seeing'?
Furthermore, what has led you to think or believe and claim that all the 'seen' stars, in the night sky, do not exist in what 'you' call 'at present'?
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:24 am
Besides, what is triggered in your mind could be an illusion and do not represent anything 'real'.
For example, exactly like a fair amount of what you say and claim here "veritas aequitas", right?
Or, does this what is 'triggered' in that 'thinking' in 'that body' could be an illusion does not apply to 'you' nor to 'your claims and writings' here?
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:24 am
At such, you need to expand your thinking for your own sake in doing philosophy.
Okay. Like what 'you' have "veritas aequitas"?
Or, can no one reach and achieve what you are showing and revealing to 'us' here?