-where reality as all-there-is is viewed as somehow related to the human conditions it enable to possibility and opportunity to control certain aspects of reality and the individual themselves from being at the mercy of an independent reality.
Rather than a product which can be misleading, reality [all there is] it is an 'emergence' that is subsequently realized as real and then cognized, perceived, known and described.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 8:51 am I think I've been trying to address VA's actual argument, concentrating on his main premise:
reality is nothing more than a product of an 'evolved, fundamental framework and system of reality and cognition' (EFFSRC)
- and so dependent in some way on us humans.
First I do not deny there is an external reality from the common and conventional sense. This is my empirical realist's view.Viz: humans are part of reality, which is all there is; but there is no reality outside or unconditioned by a human EFFSRC. Which I think is patent and demonstrable nonsense.
But then when do serious and more rigorous philosophy we are faced with:
The "the way of a straightforward and confident answer" is the mind-independence of philosophical realism, i.e. it is common and and conventional sense that things exists regardless of humans.When we have realized the obstacles in the way of a straightforward and confident answer, we shall be well launched on the study of philosophy -
- for philosophy is merely the attempt to answer such ultimate questions, not carelessly and dogmatically, as we do in ordinary life and even in the sciences,
but critically after exploring all that makes such questions puzzling, and after realizing all the vagueness and confusion that underlie our ordinary ideas.
Problem of Philosophy - Russell
https://www.ditext.com/russell/rus1.html
When one realized there are obstacles to the above, one is launched into philosophy-proper. In Russell's case, he realized there is a possibility;
In the case of Kant and other antirealists, they realize "the way of a straightforward and confident answer" of philosophical realism is contentious and not tenable at a higher deliberation of FSRC-ed reality.Among these surprising possibilities, doubt suggests that perhaps there is no table at all. Philosophy, if it cannot answer so many questions as we could wish, has at least the power of asking questions which increase the interest of the world, and show the strangeness and wonder lying just below the surface even in the commonest things of daily life.
ibid
Consider, apart from empirical realism, within a higher perspective of the FSRC-ed reality;
if humans are intricately part and parcel of the FSRC-ed reality [all there is],
how can humans [affixed to reality as all-there-is] extricate themselves out of the all-there-is to have an objective independent view of the FSRC-ed all-there-is [which they are in]?
Therefore the more realistic view is FSRC-ed reality cannot be absolutely independent of the human conditions.
Besides, the absolutely independent of the human conditions view of an reality serves no pragmatic purpose for humanity as whole other than to soothe the individuals' terrible psychological dissonances arising from an existential crisis and the default ex nihilo fit impulse.
In addition, this philosophical realism view is extended to theism, it had generated terrible evil acts to humanity in the name of an independent God.
On the other hand, where reality as all-there-is is viewed as somehow related to the human conditions it enable humans the possibility and opportunity to control certain aspects of reality and the individual themselves from being at the mercy of an independent reality.
Discuss??
Views??