|
Inlägg #1: Postat: 2002-10-26 00:18:00
|
|
Sebastian Weil |
Det hela handlar om existensförhållandet mellan ett medvetande samt existens.
Ett medvetande är per definition någonting som uppfattar någonting existens. Existens är att någonting existerar. Existens är oberoende av ett medvetande. Medvetande är beroende av existens.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #2: Postat: 2002-10-27 01:57:00
|
|
Frederik |
SW: Dunno. What you say makes me think of the Zen koan Does a falling tree make noise when theres no-one there to hear it? or something like that. Funnily enough, from a purely philosophical and human point of view heres already were belief starts. Whats existence anyway? Isnt it consciousness? You wont find true answers here. Only your own definitions and views.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #3: Postat: 2002-10-27 16:36:00
|
|
Sebastian Weil 1 |
F: Your text conists of:
1 The tree metaphor.
2 The word philosophical
3 The word "belief".
4 The word existence
5 Consciousness
6 That there is no way to find truth, but only relativistic conclusions.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #4: Postat: 2002-10-27 16:57:00
|
|
Sebastian Weil 2 |
1 The tree metaphor is a classical metaphor when coming to handling the primacy of consciousness. The primacy of consciousness theory states that consciousness creates reality and that reality relies on consciousness. Sometimes it is some divine power’s consciousness that creates reality, and sometimes it is the consciousness of each and every individual consciousness creating an individual reality.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #5: Postat: 2002-10-27 16:58:00
|
|
Sebastian Weil 3 |
But the theory of primacy contradicts itself. Because, to be conscious, is to be _aware of something_. You can’t be aware without something to _be aware of_. Which means that a consciousness without something to be conscious of is not a consciousness. Neither can a consciousness be aware of itself and claim to be independent of existence, because if a consciousness is aware of itself, it is aware of something that exists – it must itself exist – and therefore it is aware of existence.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #6: Postat: 2002-10-27 17:27:00
|
|
Frederik |
So what? You make lots of absolute claims out of a relative position. You cant be aware of yourself only, since youre surrounded by things, i.e. you dont know how pure being would feel, nor can you claim that its impossible, except by the means of a logic thats limited by your own condition. Yours is a position of belief, just like mine.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #7: Postat: 2002-10-27 17:32:00
|
|
Frederik |
In case youd accuse me of choosing an easy relativistic way out: my own criterion for truth is in the end that approach that works, i.e. responds most accurately ? to my intuition as a human being. You wont see me actively spreading my beliefs, but if someone would ask, all I could say is Go where I went, and youll see the things that Ive seen.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #8: Postat: 2002-10-27 18:23:00
|
|
Sebastian Weil |
So what!? If the theory of primacy of consciousness contradicts itself, it is wrong. That is why. I havent written that one can be aware only of oneself, so, we dont have to discuss that further.
The problem with your definition of truth is that it is linked with yourself, and whatever strange ideas you might have, and not logic. If truth isnt linked to logic and rationality, it is not truth at all.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #9: Postat: 2002-10-27 20:08:00
|
|
Sebastian Weil 4 |
2 The word “philosophical”. Comes from the word “philosophy”, being philosophical means “using philosophy”. Philosophy is a system that handles reality. But it is also the _understanding_ of reality. Being philosophical is to understand nature. To claim there is a god, is not to be philosophical since it goes against reality. To study reality, one must recognize that objects have identity, and that conclusions are possible since world exists in a particular way.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #10: Postat: 2002-10-27 20:08:00
|
|
Sebastian Weil 5 |
3 The word belief. Belief is linked with faith, which stands against knowledge. To have faith is to accept something that hasn’t got logical facts, or that even goes against logic. To have knowledge, is to accept something on the basis of logic and rationality. To claim there is a god is to have belief, and is _not_ to have knowledge.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #11: Postat: 2002-10-27 20:08:00
|
|
Sebastian Weil 6 |
4, 5 The word existence and consciousness. Existence means that there is something as opposed to nothing. Existence is not consciousness – consciousness is something that is aware of existence. Existence does not require a consciousness, however, consciousness requires existence. Existence is primary.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #12: Postat: 2002-10-27 20:09:00
|
|
Sebastian Weil 7 |
6 To claim there is no truth. Is to claim there is no reality, and no existents which to identify. It is a claim which states that there is no existence at all.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #13: Postat: 2002-10-28 09:24:00
|
|
Kent Davidsson |
The only thing you can be sure of SW, is that your experiences exist. Everything else is speculation.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #14: Postat: 2002-10-28 11:50:00
|
|
Sebastian Weil reply to KD |
Stating that only experiences exists, is to state that existence exists. For something to exist, it has to exist AS SOMETHING. So, Kent, in your observation that experiences exists, you also observe that existence exists. We can be sure that existence exists.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #15: Postat: 2002-10-28 14:29:00
|
|
Kent Davidsson svar på 14 |
I am sorry, but the implications of a statement as trivial as "existence exists" are hidden for me. Do you think that you can prove, logically, Gods non-existance from the statement "experiences exist"?
|
| |
|
Inlägg #16: Postat: 2002-10-28 15:39:00
|
|
Frederik |
SW: You make the difference in your statements between something that exists A and the consciousness that perceives this something B. First you say that A can exist without B, but then to prove your point in 14 you say that A can be B. Not very logical, is it?
|
| |
|
Inlägg #17: Postat: 2002-10-28 15:43:00
|
|
Frederik |
Answer to 9: not true. Philosophy literally a philosopher means a friend of wisdom does not handle reality, but is thinking about thinking. Lots of philosophers have been philosophising about the existence and nature of God. Some early Greek philosophers Id have to check the names also considered empiricism to be unnecessary, basing themselves on their thoughts alone.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #18: Postat: 2002-10-28 15:47:00
|
|
Frederik |
Answer to 10: There are more forms to acquire knowledge than by perceiving things and through logic. Think of intuition, which you might call unlogical,hence no knowledge but which has saved countless lives. Or try to prove logically the love of a spouse for his/her partner. You cant, even though the spouse will say that s/he knows, and is probably right. If you base your relationships on logic and rationality, then youll be a very lonely man indeed.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #19: Postat: 2002-10-28 15:49:00
|
|
Frederik |
Answer to 12: What do you base your idea on that consciousness and existence are separate?
|
| |
|
Inlägg #20: Postat: 2002-10-28 15:51:00
|
|
Frederik |
sorry, 19 is an answer to 11 Answer to 12: I dont say that there is no truth, only that we as humans are unable to ever fully perceive it. Were bound to subjectivity by the mere fact of being human. Even science is only a method to limit subjectivity. Its unable to fully eliminate it.
|
| |