|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
|
Re: Epistemology and the Primacy of Existence [Re: it stars saddam]
#5241548 - 01/30/06 09:25 AM (18 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
You know why the "S-bomb" is so effective in arguments, Phred? It's because it is a GLARING philosophical paradox.
It is true that the behavior of Solipsists is riddled with contradictions (paradoxes, if you prefer) which is why it is a total waste of time to engage them in "debate".
Solipsism is not a philosophy, it is an anti-philosophy and as such contributes nothing to philosophical discussion. Solipsism is also profoundly anti-spiritual and as such contributes nothing to spiritual discussion either.
You are of course free to indulge in talking to yourself (as a Solipsist any "communication" in which you "partake" is necessarily talking to yourself and not to other entities -- other entities do not exist to a Solipsist) and I am free to point out that there is nothing to be gained by responding to one who is talking to himself.
This has nothing to do with being grumpy and everything to do with being rational. I merely suggest that those who believe their discussion partners exist continue communicating amongst themselves and ignore those who don't believe they are talking to anyone other than themselves.
The individual members of the forum are of course free to follow my advice or discard it.
Having said that, I will now follow my own advice and continue the discussion with those who believe I exist.
Phred
--------------------
|
it stars saddam
Satan
Registered: 05/19/05
Posts: 15,571
Loc: Spahn Ranch
|
Re: Epistemology and the Primacy of Existence [Re: Phred]
#5241554 - 01/30/06 09:27 AM (18 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I wasn't aware that solipsism included a doctrine of "acceptable" behaviors.
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Epistemology and the Primacy of Existence [Re: Sclorch]
#5241618 - 01/30/06 10:07 AM (18 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sclorch said: Assume that existence exists independently of yourself, essence takes a hit. Assume nothing, fall down that solipsistic well.
Is there a third option? That's what I'd like to find.
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: Epistemology and the Primacy of Existence [Re: Sclorch]
#5241943 - 01/30/06 12:35 PM (18 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Hmm perhaps the third option arises out of the two ? [I can't see it, as I haven't understood both well enough, or focused out far enough ]
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: Epistemology and the Primacy of Existence [Re: BlueCoyote]
#5242142 - 01/30/06 01:33 PM (18 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
What about 'possibility' ?
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger
Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Epistemology and the Primacy of Existence [Re: BlueCoyote]
#5242321 - 01/30/06 02:29 PM (18 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Yessir! Probabilities!
Fall into the nihilistic well of infinite possibilities with me. I'm lonely down here.
Its possible all of this Reality could be entirely a construction of my mind. Nothing actually exists externally; I?m could be living in some sort of dream world. (Not to mention, I could be a butterfly hallucinating I?m a human or something equally as ridiculous.) There is no way to validate whether I am in fantasyland or not.
I regard Solipsism as a meaningless philosophy. Falling into this belief, even if its true, will lead you nowhere... except maybe to loneliness. Likewise, if its true, disbelieving in it will not harm you in any way. I?ve decided to notice the possibility of this, but behave as if it wasn?t a possibility at all.
I place my faith in empiricism. It only takes a very small leap of faith, and from then on, you're on solid ground. Mystical bogwash, spiritual planes, and similar ilk may all exist, but how could I ever really know? Mysticism is based in some arbitary cloud of thought which I can never comfirm or refute with my own senses. I generally regard anything outside of the human sensory manifold as meaningless. Unlike empiric evidence, which we can check and verify, spirituality, along with much of "rationalism", is something we can only chatter about.
Unfortunately, not all our empiric evidences fits together to form a coherent picture of the universe. I have to decide for myself, based on the evidece I have, which things seem to be most supported and which are least supported. While its possible the least supported thing is the 'truth', its doesn't seem very plausible.
And so on....
|
it stars saddam
Satan
Registered: 05/19/05
Posts: 15,571
Loc: Spahn Ranch
|
Re: Epistemology and the Primacy of Existence [Re: MushmanTheManic]
#5242767 - 01/30/06 04:24 PM (18 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said: I?ve decided to notice the possibility of this, but behave as if it wasn?t a possibility at all.
I place my faith in empiricism. It only takes a very small leap of faith, and from then on, you're on solid ground.
Well said.
|
SkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
|
Re: Epistemology and the Primacy of Existence [Re: it stars saddam]
#5243188 - 01/30/06 05:52 PM (18 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
say I did admit that my consciousness was a projection of the brain's functions; how does this take solipsism out of the picture?
This would negate the premise that only your range of perception is reality, along with whatever existents happen to fall within such a range. You would have to admit, that there are things which exist outside of your perception.. and from there, so forth.
What is consciousness conscious of besides itself?
Existence.
Did Ayn Rand ever come into contact with the fabled "ultimate objective reality?"
Ultimately, we are all part of this objective reality, hence we are all in contact with it, one way or another.
because no conscious being on this planet has any mode of perception other than their own singular subjective experience (this is assuming that there is consciousness beyond one's own, which still remains murky at best).
Merely because one has experiences which are particular to that individual, does not negate the fact that, like all existents and existing processes, they are part of an objective system of reality. There is no intrinsic line or border. I covered this in the Are Things Unknowable thread, and that is a subject I'm not interested in discussing, nor am I going to bother with any attempt to rectify your nescience on Ayn Rand and her philosophies, as it would be a waste of time and entirely fruitless.
At last, I, er.. YOU, think I [YOU] will take Phred's advice and leave this as my [or, should I say, YOURS] response to this matter.
In all honesty, it has been a pretty interesting and comical debate. Like Sclorch, I this thread [and topic, in general].
-------------------- Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.
|
blaze2
The Witness
Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
|
|
good stuff guys, I think i'm about out of arguments whats been said is pretty much agree to disagree on things. Peace
blaze2
and thanks for the return apology skorp
-------------------- "Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein "peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein "Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." Thomas Jefferson "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson
|
|