Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity.
    #21211076 - 02/01/15 01:45 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Alternatively; How to Hate a Philosopher.

Descartes was a glorified solipsist. His effect on history is generally negative. He is the lickspittle of all philosophers.

Descartes proposed the method of doubting the traditional subject of knowledge, which changed the meaning of a subject to its present equivocality. The subject of knowledge as it is found in Aristotle's Hypokeimenon as the "underlying thing", was the first thing Descartes doubted, followed by the senses, until he arrived at what he felt was finally something that could not be doubted in the proposition cogito ergo sum. Cogito ergo sum established as a relative and essentially conflicting point of focus to the subject we study, the subject we are, or what we refer to as the quality of subjectivity.

He wrote in latin and referred to the loan translation of hypokeimenon as subjectum meaning to "throw under". I would point this out, because while reaching a "point" of subjectivity is solipsistic, it is something modern people embody in a practical gesture in such a way, which is different and antithetical, but just a çhange in point oof reference from what it it ostensibly critical of in Aristotle, as a subject of knowledge.

Today there is generally a subject of knowledge you can study, something you speak upon as a subject, or read about or study, and on the other hand the subject Descartes suggested you "are". It is the same word. This state of affairs brought by Descartes' "method" of doubting subjects from that locus of a subject, is actually a shift in point of focus and critique at the same time. Descartes "throws under" the subject.

Interpretation:

The latter form of subjectivity Descartes established idealistically as a "foundation" of knowledge is really just a point of projected eccentricity or idiosyncrasy that can never be reached or argumentatively established. The "actual" position of solipsism is impossible in otherwords, but while solipsism can be relatively approached (and somewhat self consistently projected as a quality of being), this essentially describes a subject that is approached without possibly being found. Note; my point in saying this is not just because something might be subjective in this "sense" (the description qualifies for what we call subjective as something unfounded to conjecture) but also because generally the idea of subjectivity was never found in any certainty, as significant locus at all. That again becomes essential to what is represented as subjective, as a point of what is irrelavent to conjecture, as such.

The place of a subject, as the certainty of the thinking thing is a rationalistic stance, which Descartes theoretically pointed to as an impression of what might be leftover after doubtful things are shed away. But while subjectivity may be approached, this point of reference may never really be said to be found, because the foundation of its certainty is solipsistic in the basic statement cogito ergo sum.

If you look at solipsism as the essential argument (that is, the statement aside from his ontological argument), when you find yourself standing on this, or in this, you can't say anything. This is again close to suggesting the broached description or quality of something being subjective (as what is impossible to evoke to a level of discussion), it could seem questionable that this would suggest anything at all.

I think the project which seeks certainty through methodological doubt in general, is not considered in its appropriate implications. We believe methodological doubt is on the way, progressing toward a value of what is undoubteble in some such thing, (and we believe in "progress", and "doubt") but in the end there are only gross estimations and a sense of essential conflict in what subjectivity describes as a point of reference. Why was the subject we are, called a subject?

A subject is what Descartes seems to look away from...and to... As subjectum. The latin subjectum describes this perfectly, as sub- -jacere, what we "throw under", and of course it was revolutionary, to Aristotle's subject.

Descartes' testament is not quite in what he intended. Later most interpreters have come to believe that his ontological argument, or argument for a thinking thing, which was his way of situating subjectum in a world and as a dependent variable, is clearly wrong in its part.

Where comes the value of the eccentricity and idiosyncrasy of the modern subject, and what to? I think Descartes' meditation can be interpreted in a broad sense as really having nothing to do with the value of knowledge, or nature per se, but as a result of a gradual trend in a human world to adopt ostensibly more individual or technically abstruse values. It is not either solipsism of the thinking thing, but still an approach toward it, and in that tendency something seems to be impressed a tendency of idiosyncracy or technical character of thought that maintains that content about the world should be contained in thinking. (It becomes a competitive thing to be technical, as if it were some basis of knowledge).

Today solipsism and eccentricity is a trap we easily fall into, as we have learned in a way to convene around and about "it" and extrapolate from this impossible point. The value of Cartesian subjectivity should not be seen in its seeking certainty or knowledge but in general bearing the possibility of making certain slippery kinds of inductions, (namely the kind a solipsist makes) that turn the physical world into something increasingly alien to us.

Descartes to my mind above all stood for the machinations we are always more and more subject to. At the same time it is thanks to Descartes also that we are walking around believing nothing is real or tangible at all, as ghosts of our machines.

This is as I see it, how the substantive subject of knowledge, as hypokeimenon as "underlying thing" became what it is today as subjectum or what is "thrown under".

Edited by Kurt (07/27/15 02:35 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLakefingers
Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. *DELETED* [Re: Kurt]
    #21211568 - 02/01/15 03:29 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Post deleted by Lakefingers

Reason for deletion: No reason.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRahz
Alive Again
Male


Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,395
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Lakefingers] * 1
    #21213995 - 02/01/15 10:39 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

I'm not the most well read in philosophy but I've always taken solipsism as a principal. There is logic in the idea, but along with it should come the notion that making reasonable assumptions is a useful thing. Solipsism taken literally is more absurd than believing everything is as it seems, and is just as fundamentally unexplainable. For this reason it seems more likely it was meant as a principal pointing out the usefulness of being skeptical in any matter before making up ones mind, which at the time was a much needed point of view... as it still is today, though it does not exist with the intent of coddling the mind.

All the factual knowledge in the world cannot provide existential meaning free from skeptical inquiry, though people are free to build a house of cards with whatever cards they choose. Maybe the wind won't blow. Maybe it will. Perhaps real freedom is experienced after the gust? Or perhaps it's best to find shelter? How can the answer not be subjective?


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace
I am      I feel      I do     I love I speak    I see    I know


“Science advances one funeral at a time”
~Max Planck

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibler72rock
Maybe so. Maybe not.
Male


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/06/09
Posts: 1,327
Loc: Chicago Flag
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Rahz]
    #21214092 - 02/01/15 11:03 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Rahz said:
I've always taken solipsism as a principal.




Never knew there were others. :tongue:

But yeah, on a more serious note, it can be drawn out a little more. Russell coined the term "Solipsism of the present moment." Russell takes it a step further as a point, and says that even the idea that "you" existed in the past is a farce. All you have is yourself in this very moment because your memory is nothing more than a record in your brain being read right now.


--------------------
Current favorite candy: Peanut Butter Kisses

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,485
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: r72rock]
    #21214660 - 02/02/15 04:41 AM (9 years, 3 months ago)

except memory is not read, it is like a beaten pillow supporting your head, every fold and angle tilt predisposing the person to perception and reaction.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Lakefingers]
    #21216586 - 02/02/15 03:17 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Thanks Lakefingers. I had a longer response prepared but I realize I have to step back and think about this. I agree it seems appropriate to consider skepticism more broadly, maybe to find a specific dialogical response to it.

I was kidding around about the idea of hating a philosopher...They are too old to be hated probably. I can't very well hate someone writing Latin, it is hard to pick out the infuriating nuances of tone and rhetoric.

Edited by Kurt (02/02/15 03:57 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRahz
Alive Again
Male


Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,395
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Kurt]
    #21218437 - 02/02/15 09:07 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Do philosophers really change the world, or just point out it's folly? Can we really blame Descartes for the modern subjective malaise, or is it just an age old part of the human condition? I mentioned skepticism being a needed thing, but has it really increased due to philosophical giants musing, or is it too a human propensity?

Also, perhaps if I'm correct then Descartes by providing a keen observation of the limits of perception might have also provided the direction for an escape from an absence of objective meaning. A person needs no permission to value subjective meaning, but tends to want an authority to provide it. He did at least prompt this discussion.

How much influence do philosophers really have? I might want to get into the biz myself if it's lucrative. I've always been in for the fortune, but will consider settling for fame and influence.


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace
I am      I feel      I do     I love I speak    I see    I know


“Science advances one funeral at a time”
~Max Planck

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,485
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Rahz]
    #21219581 - 02/03/15 05:24 AM (9 years, 3 months ago)

they are frequently consulted by other philosophers


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRahz
Alive Again
Male


Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,395
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: redgreenvines]
    #21221142 - 02/03/15 01:22 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Ahh, so they critique each other and ask questions to further their own understanding? Interesting but it doesn't change the world. Perhaps there is a butterfly effect?


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace
I am      I feel      I do     I love I speak    I see    I know


“Science advances one funeral at a time”
~Max Planck

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,485
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Rahz]
    #21221816 - 02/03/15 03:53 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

they radiate intense smugness so I don't think so


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Rahz]
    #21223638 - 02/03/15 09:59 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Rahz said:
Ahh, so they critique each other and ask questions to further their own understanding? Interesting but it doesn't change the world. Perhaps there is a butterfly effect?




Thanks for your posts. I was trying to understand how to respond, since its my opinion that philosophers primarily intend to understand the nature of reality, and that specifically to me means letting it be what it is. Granted this is an intent that does not seem to often be beared out.

I think the unintended effect of trying to understand reality sometimes is in evoking certain impressions, which are then given to be exaggerated. Methods of gathering knowledge, for instance, prescribe looking for causal reflexes in nature, and that becomes a point of focus to us. We like to find these reflexes for our own means and ends, and coming to that, even "make" reflexes where there formally speaking aren't any.

This to me would be the apparent butterfly effect of knowing nature, which is largely unintended. It is the perfect metaphor actually... but I might be thinking of it differently.

Its interesting to hear the perspective you are seeing this from is so different, as from the beginning you enquire into how philosophers might be changing the nature of reality.

In any case it reminds me that evoking a simplified idea of a subject of knowledge (again, the subject we study or the subject of grammar) is something that would need the same critique as what I'm attempting to suggest for subjectivism. Even if it does relatively simplify things to avoid falling into a consideration of a subject we "are", if the comparison merited anything, this would have to suggest a critique of the subject of knowledge in general.

Edited by Kurt (02/05/15 04:22 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Kurt]
    #21223747 - 02/03/15 10:29 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

...by that I mean a critique of the concept "hypokeimenon" which I'd been advocating anyway.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: redgreenvines]
    #21223883 - 02/03/15 11:11 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

redgreenvines said:
they radiate intense smugness so I don't think so




You are taking the alternate topic pretty seriously...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,485
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Kurt]
    #21224402 - 02/04/15 04:14 AM (9 years, 3 months ago)

it's true, we only radiate heat


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRahz
Alive Again
Male


Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,395
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: redgreenvines]
    #21228156 - 02/04/15 09:27 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

After some thought I can see how philosophers might have a notable influence on the future but at the same time they could also be products of the times. The amassing of knowledge could be the true culprit, Descartes was the right mind at the right time to express a new paradigm, and ironically it would have been pre-Cartesian religious institutions that played a large part in that endeavor by being a promoter of science.

Regarding the primary topic, I'll guess the underlying nature of reality is mundane and not as interesting as the secondary subject matter. It is mystical as far as I can tell, though not in the oxymoronic sense. Rather than reduce things in the way Descartes intended (did anything come from it other than "I think therefore I am"?) I see doubt as a tool to be used in so much as it pleases me. My goal is not so much to discover the deepest truth as to know when truth is being withheld or obfuscated (by others or self). This may or may not be the most philosophical intention, but to take doubt to it's furthest conclusions seems to be madness, as you seem to suggest in your topic.

This is what I meant by solipsism being a principal rather than a truth. We cannot know anything (perhaps even cogito ergo sum) with certainty, so we wing it.

I feel my reply is sophomoric, and have trouble imagining how hypokeimenon might relate to metaphysical topics (hence my mystical bent), though I'm curious if anything I've said is relevant. :smile:


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace
I am      I feel      I do     I love I speak    I see    I know


“Science advances one funeral at a time”
~Max Planck

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Rahz]
    #21231094 - 02/05/15 03:20 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

I don't see you as a run of the mill mystic.  What do you mean by calling yourself mystical?


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Rahz]
    #21232029 - 02/05/15 06:26 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Hi Rahz, enjoying the dialogue.

I think for me to understand you completely, you have to be able to state the principle you have in mind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRahz
Alive Again
Male


Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,395
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Icelander]
    #21232517 - 02/05/15 08:04 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Icelander said:
I don't see you as a run of the mill mystic.  What do you mean by calling yourself mystical?




This was something I stumbled on years back as I was discarding the "run of the mill" mystical ideas which generally involve deities handing off some secret information. The meat of the knowledge is in knowing I don't know (mystic). Of course, one cannot be sure if something is unknowable but I get the sense some things are, and when these experiences accumulate it guides my philosophy away from areas that I suspect are futile to continue in.

For instance, I don't know why the universe exists. The existence of the universe and by extension all things is mystical to me. There may be some mathematical explanation for why this instance exists or why a multiverse exists, but it seems like it wouldn't explain the potential existing, only describe it. Does that makes sense? In much the same way, I don't know why I exist. There is desire but ultimately it's never reasonable. The purpose of life is unknown, but we are by having an experience revealing our own purpose. Logic and reason are but tools for guiding and justifying our unreasonable desires.

As it pertains to the topic I meant to suggest that I have two notions of hypokeimenon which are based in dualism, and as a matter of the metaphysical I don't see a clear path to non-subjective knowledge.

Kurt, does that clarify my position? I think maybe if you describe "hypokeimenon in a more originary sense" I would have a better idea of the alternative you propose.


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace
I am      I feel      I do     I love I speak    I see    I know


“Science advances one funeral at a time”
~Max Planck

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Rahz]
    #21245812 - 02/08/15 09:33 PM (9 years, 3 months ago)

I don't think what you said clarifies any principle of subjectivity...but what you say and how you stand is somewhat clear as someone pragmatically adopting a cartesian sensibility.

Hypokeimenon as an "underlying thing" could also be called an "essence".

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 10 months
Re: On the subject of knowledge, and subjectivity. [Re: Kurt]
    #21246431 - 02/09/15 02:23 AM (9 years, 3 months ago)

Descartes was a psycho animal torturer

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Problems in Philosophy: Knowledge chodamunky 1,075 3 05/03/04 08:38 AM
by TheShroomHermit
* Descartes = Question Beggar
( 1 2 all )
buttonion 3,281 30 09/17/04 09:06 PM
by MarkostheGnostic
* Are morals subjective?
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 5,865 35 04/24/03 05:58 AM
by MarkostheGnostic
* Real knowledge... Sclorch 777 6 01/25/03 07:33 AM
by Grav
* Do you feel your knowledge is a burden or a gift?
( 1 2 all )
Grav 5,353 37 09/08/02 09:55 PM
by Anonymous
* Subjective v. Objective Reality
( 1 2 all )
Joshua 4,239 24 01/31/03 07:31 PM
by Joshua
* Questions & Answers
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Lord_of_Fungus 10,480 78 03/19/04 06:26 PM
by SkorpivoMusterion
* why christianity is bullshit
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all )
KingOftheThing 24,596 161 04/24/11 05:50 PM
by Holy Bud

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
2,847 topic views. 0 members, 5 guests and 16 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 14 queries.