Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #62405

Re: Joy of this, Joy of that

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Sat, 14 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 14/12/2024 10:57, D wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, 13 Dec 2024, rbowman wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:13:50 +0100, D wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Zeno? Well, it does sound you made quite an attack on the first book out
>>>> of 12!  My least favourite part of that series is the middle ages and
>>>> the christian philosophers and theologians. For some reason, very, very
>>>> uninteresting to me. But greek, yes, rome, yes, then nothing, up until
>>>> the enlightenment, when things start to become interesting again.
>>> 
>>> I'd have to look at the ordering but I think that's where my interest
>>> petered out. I liked the Nominalists. Confirmation bias, I guess. My
>>> natural setting regards Platonic realism as a major wrong turn in thought.
>>> 
>> 
>> Amen! The nominalists were (are) the Donald Trump of metaphysicists!
>
> Nominalism is a crude form of transcendental idealism in that it clearly 
> separates the term, from the reality it describes.
>
> Which as you say, is not Platonic realism.
>
> The problem with Plato is that his realism was really idealism, in that he 
> regarded the ideas as more fundamental than things.
>
> As I said, Kant really drew everything together to produce the hybrid model 
> in which the world - whether you think of it as material or not - was to be 
> distinguished absolutely from our *conception *of it....

What is your opinion on the transcendental error?

The Transcendental Error: One significant flaw in Kant’s thinking is what 
has been termed the “transcendental error.” This refers to Kant’s tendency 
to conflate the limits of human cognition with the nature of reality 
itself. According to critics like Peter Strawson, while Kant correctly 
seeks to explore what we can understand about our experiences, he 
mistakenly concludes that these limits are imposed by our cognitive 
faculties on a reality that could be structured differently. This leads to 
an incoherent position where one cannot meaningfully consider a reality 
devoid of these structures because such a consideration relies on the very 
cognitive faculties that Kant claims impose those structures. Thus, this 
misunderstanding undermines the objective status of knowledge and reality.

In The Bounds of Sense, P. F. Strawson suggests a reading of Kant's first 
Critique that, once accepted, forces rejection of most of the original 
arguments, including transcendental idealism. Strawson contends that, had 
Kant followed out the implications of all that he said, he would have seen 
that there were many self-contradictions implicit in the whole.[12]: 403 

Strawson views the analytic argument of the transcendental deduction as 
the most valuable idea in the text, and regards transcendental idealism as 
an unavoidable error in Kant's greatly productive system. In Strawson's 
traditional reading (also favored in the work of Paul Guyer and Rae 
Langton), the Kantian term phenomena (literally, things that can be 
seen—from Greek: phainomenon, "observable") refers to the world of 
appearances, or the world of "things" sensed.[13]: 99–101  They are tagged 
as "phenomena" to remind the reader that humans confuse these derivative 
appearances with whatever may be the forever unavailable "things in 
themselves" behind our perceptions. The necessary preconditions of 
experience, the components that humans bring to their apprehending of the 
world, the forms of perception such as space and time, are what make a 
priori judgments possible, but all of this process of comprehending what 
lies fundamental to human experience fails to bring anyone beyond the 
inherent limits of human sensibility. Kant's system requires the existence 
of noumena to prevent a rejection of external reality altogether, and it 
is this concept (senseless objects of which we can have no real 
understanding) to which Strawson objects in his book.

> The middle ages were restrictive in terms of Christianity, but Jewish 
> mysticism and philosophy flourished, as did the philosophy and science of the 
> Persians. Before that became subsumed by Islam and vanished.
>
> The study of what people *thought* was real, through the ages, is a 
> fascinating history that isn't really covered by any discipline. Myths and 
> Magics, religions and gods, forces and demiurges. And then to Materialism and 
> Laws of Nature.

A cross section of the history of ideas and philosophy of science maybe? 
It is very interesting!

> "Maps of consciousness" as Ralph Metzner put it.
>
>

Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-07 23:36 +0100
  Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-08 03:36 +0000
    Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-08 12:10 +0100
      Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-08 22:31 +0000
        Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-09 10:43 +0100
          Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-09 23:15 +0000
            Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-10 10:20 +0100
              Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-10 19:31 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-10 22:03 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-11 01:44 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-11 11:03 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-12 01:11 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-12 10:21 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-12 20:08 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-12 21:31 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-13 01:29 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-13 11:13 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-13 20:28 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-14 11:57 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-14 13:03 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-14 19:40 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-14 19:57 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-15 12:11 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-15 12:37 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-15 19:28 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-13 10:42 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-13 20:18 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-14 11:54 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-14 11:18 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-14 19:02 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-14 18:37 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-14 23:01 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-14 18:43 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-14 19:59 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-15 00:33 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-15 11:25 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-14 23:05 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-15 01:04 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-15 11:27 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-14 11:17 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-14 11:28 +0100
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-14 13:14 +0000
                Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-14 19:07 +0100
                Re: Joy of Translation Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2024-12-11 12:33 +0000
                Re: Joy of Translation Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2024-12-11 15:16 +0000
                Re: Joy of Translation rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-12 01:15 +0000
                Re: Joy of Translation Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-12-12 05:06 +0000
                Re: Joy of Translation rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-12 08:24 +0000
                Re: Joy of Translation D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-12 10:37 +0100
                Re: Joy of Translation rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-12 20:15 +0000
                Re: Joy of Translation D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-12 21:33 +0100
                Re: Joy of Translation rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-13 01:47 +0000
                Re: Joy of Translation D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-13 11:20 +0100
                Re: Joy of Translation rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-13 20:50 +0000
                Re: Joy of Translation D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-14 12:00 +0100
            Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-10 15:42 +0000
              Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-10 19:58 +0000
              Re: Joy of this, Joy of that D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-12-10 21:12 +0100
              Re: Joy of this, Joy of that Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-12-10 22:49 +0000
        Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-09 12:37 +0000
          Re: Joy of this, Joy of that rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-09 21:12 +0000
            Re: Joy of this, Joy of that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-10 11:18 +0000

csiph-web