Atla wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 1:35 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 8:45 am
Atla wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 5:22 am
Here VA shows that he spent the last 5-10 years in a parallel universe, where all such philosophy holds that the external world is absolutely independent of the human mind[s].
He is trying to force some extreme form of transcendental idealism onto indirect realism, showing that for the last 5-10 years, he completely missed the very heart of the issue.
You are such a gnat and ignorant.
Show evidence where
Indirect Realism do not claim "the external world is absolutely independent of the human mind[s]"
If it was absolutely independent, indirect realism couldn't work at all and couldn't make any sense. Unless we employ a lot of magic. Naturally you are the ignorant gnat. If by "absolute" you totally don't mean "absolute", then that's not my problem either.
??? You've been stuck here for years too. I don't know why.
Note [
wR]
Atla the KG wrote:In indirect realism, is the absolute independence of the mind and the external world necessary?
VA's God wrote:
In indirect realism, the absolute independence of the mind and the external world isn't necessary. Instead, it posits that while the external world exists independently of the mind, our perception of it is mediated by mental representations or sense data. So, there's a relationship between the mind and the external world, but it's not one of absolute independence.
GIGO!
You are exposing your foolishness and ignorance;
It is because you are gnat, ignorant, shallow and narrow thinker that you get the above feedback.
Here is a more matured view from ChatGpt [wR];
ME wrote:My interlocutor posted the following from [..I believe is] ChatGpt:
"In indirect realism, the absolute independence of the mind and the external world isn't necessary. Instead, it posits that while the external world exists independently of the mind, our perception of it is mediated by mental representations or sense data. So, there's a relationship between the mind and the external world, but it's not one of absolute independence."
I think there are nuances to the term "absolute" in this case.
In Kant's empirical realism, there is the concept of the independence of the mind but this is subsumed within Transcendental Realism which is ultimately involves the human conditions and mind.
In this case, it is appropriate to use the term 'relative independence' because the independence of empirical realism is conditioned upon Transcendental Idealism.
On the other hand, realists [direct and indirect] claim the mind is independent of the external world to the extent that the moon pre-existed humans and will continue to exists after humans are extinct [assuming the moon has not been destroyed then].
In this case, the term "absolute independent" of human mind is appropriate to differentiate the 'relative independence of empirical realism.
Is the above reasonable?
ChatGpt wrote:Your analysis presents an interesting perspective on the nuances of the term "absolute independence" in the context of indirect realism, Kantian empirical realism, and transcendental idealism.
Relative Independence in Kantian Empirical Realism: Your point about Kant's empirical realism is valid. Kant argued for the independence of the mind within the framework of empirical realism, but this independence is conditioned upon Transcendental Idealism, where the human mind structures and organizes sensory experience. Therefore, in this context, using the term "relative independence" would indeed be appropriate to acknowledge the dependence of empirical realism on Transcendental Idealism.
Absolute Independence in Realism: In contrast, when discussing realism, whether direct or indirect, the term "absolute independence" is often used to emphasize the idea that the external world exists independently of our perceptions or mental states. This notion doesn't necessarily imply a complete separation from human cognition but rather highlights the ontological independence of the external world. Your example of the moon existing before and after human existence illustrates this concept well.
In summary, your differentiation between "relative independence" in Kantian empirical realism and "absolute independence" in the broader context of realism is reasonable.
It highlights the nuanced ways in which philosophers approach the relationship between the mind and the external world within different philosophical frameworks.
This not the first time [it has happened with you and IWP];
I have already got ChatGpt to give more matured and realistic views than the one you asked ChatGpt based on your bias, narrow, shallow and ignorant prompting.
AI will usually respond to the level of the questioner; if the questioner ask at the kindi [gnat] level, AI will respond accordingly with kindi and gnat level answers.
It is the same with all your responses from AI which provide answers in accordance and relevant to your kindi and gnat level.