Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2023 5:04 am
I am an Empirical Realist [mind-independence] and at the same time a Transcendental Idealism [conditioned upon human conditions].Magnus Anderson wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 7:41 pm ............
Another example is your "This is a goat" and "This is a bundle and cluster of molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion".
Two different descriptions that have different meanings both of which can be true since they are not mutually exclusive.
...................
They are both right, their brains are merely "speaking" in different languages.
Empirical Realism is ultimately subsumed within Transcendental Idealism [conditioned upon human conditions],thus what is ultimately real cannot be absolutely mind-independent.
Noted, Indirect Realism [philosophical realism] is a belief that things exist independent to the human mind.
You observe independent things [thing] 'out there,' you express;
1. "This is a goat"
2. "This is a bundle and cluster of molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion"
or possibly,
3. "This is a load of meat and bones with furs and so on"
4. etc.
If you think carefully, for indirect-realists, 1-4 are separate independent things.
You insist it is the 'same thing' in different languages.
But what is that 'same thing' that is supposedly permanent and 'constant'.
Btw, the only thing that is constant is change, not some mind-independent thing.
Since change is the only constant, there is no way you can ever nail "what is that 'same thing' that is supposedly permanent and 'constant' " in accordance to Indirect Realism.
Therefore Indirect Realism is a false.
I had argued fundamentally, Indirect Realism [philosophical realism] of mind-independence is merely an evolutionary default to facilitate survival that is optimize for our then and even current state, but not towards the future to facilitate greater progress of humanity with awareness of greater global and galactical threats.
I argued what is really and most real is always conditioned to a specific human based FSK and therefore cannot be absolutely mind-independent.
Kant refuted Berkeley's Subjective Idealism.If you're like Kant, you might agree with Berkeley that our visual perception is at all times, in all situations, tainted by subjectivity, but you will argue that mind-independent reality nonetheless exists, it's just that it is unknowable to us.
Kant never agreed that "mind-independent reality nonetheless exists" instead he proved that "mind-independent reality nonetheless exists" is illusory, nevertheless a useful illusion.
Kant did mention the mind-independent thing-in-itself is 'unknowable' is some sense, but ultimately there is no possibility of it to be known to be real.
- For the Intelligible would require a quite peculiar Intuition which we do not possess,
and in the absence of this [Intuition] [the intelligible] would be for us nothing at all;
and, on the other hand, it is also evident that Appearances could not be Objects-in-Themselves.
CPR Kant A280 B336
This is not true at all.The fact of the matter is that we cannot observe anything without using some sort of language.
We act upon instincts [no language needed] when triggered by triggers observed.
In the interview, [Daniel] Everett challenges the nativist theories of Noam Chomsky, arguing that Chomsky only focuses on grammar, which is only a small part of language and does not consider social or cultural origins. Everett discusses his findings on Piraha, one of nearly 8,000 spoken languages in the world, arguing that it is no different from any other language in terms of language acquisition.
Everett states that current theories of language learning do not consider semiotics and inferential reasoning and need revision. The interview also touches on the relationship between language and thought, where Everett argues that language and culture exist in a symbiotic relationship, with each one necessarily shaping and affecting the other.
According to Everett, ChatGPT has shown that language acquisition is possible without any innate grammar or language rules. This is achieved through the use of massive amounts of data, as demonstrated by Large Language Models.