Embodied Realism vs Disembodied Realism
From AI [with reservations];
The above is imputed into my principle of reality as:In their book "Philosophy in the Flesh" & "Metaphors we live by," George Lakoff and Mark Johnson propose a theory called embodied realism as an alternative to traditional disembodied realism.
Here's a breakdown of the key differences:
Disembodied Realism:
Mind: Viewed as separate and independent from the body, existing in a non-physical realm.
Thought: Seen as abstract and purely rational, not influenced by physical experiences.
Knowledge: Gained through logic and reason, independent of sensory input and bodily interaction with the world.
Metaphors: Understood as purely linguistic constructs, not reflecting deeper truths about how we think and understand the world.
Embodied Realism:
Mind: Seen as fundamentally embodied, meaning it is shaped by and inseparable from the body and its interactions with the environment.
Thought: Considered as largely unconscious and grounded in embodied experiences like sensorimotor activities and emotions.
Knowledge: Arises from embodied interactions, with basic-level concepts (e.g., chair, hot) being directly linked to bodily experiences.
Metaphors: Seen as not just linguistic but also as fundamental structures of thought, shaping how we categorize, reason, and understand the world.
Here are some key points to remember:
Embodied realism challenges the traditional mind-body dualism, arguing that the mind and body are fundamentally intertwined.
It emphasizes the role of bodily experiences, sensorimotor activity, and unconscious processes in shaping our thoughts and knowledge.
Metaphors are seen as crucial tools for understanding abstract concepts, not just as figures of speech.
Here are some examples of embodied realism:
Understanding "love" as a journey is not just a metaphor; it reflects how we experience and reason about love based on our embodied experiences of movement and direction.
Categorizing objects like "chair" is grounded in our bodily interaction with them (sitting) and not just abstract definitions.
Our emotions and bodily sensations influence our thinking and decision-making in ways that traditional realism doesn't acknowledge.
whatever is real, true, exists, factual, knowledge, objective is conditioned with an embodied FSRK, of which the scientific FSRK is the most credible and objective.
Those who oppose the above, i.e. the absolute mind-independent gang, adopt a disembodied-realism position.
Discuss??
Views??