Total Posts:80|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The duality of the human cognitive process

CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2012 7:27:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The human mind is constructed in such a way that we are incapable of grasping or understanding anything without comparing the thought to something else.

These are the grids we place over reality, the measuring sticks, etc. Our little code breaking systems that align just right if the spacing is calibrated correctly... well, ALMOST just right.

The thing is, the thing is, our cognitive handicap coupled with the limitations of our perception effectively make it impossible to be completely right, or even TRULY objective. We can only be objective from a relative standpoint, or in other words, something can only ve true based on the rules, criteria, and concepts that we use to make up the game. The measuring stick, the grid. Even the concept of "objective truth" is determined by criteria, rules, concepts, which themselves arrise out the dualistic mind. Our entire language is plagued by this, and to make matters more chaotic, no one truly has the same grasp of linguistics, and there are other non-verbal non-written factors that play into the picture. We are very ineffective communicators by nature, and it is our curse.

The duality is an illusion created by the mind. There is one, but it is none, and it is infinite. It is where everything comes, goes, and is. It was called God once, but people believed in the symbol, not the duality. The word used to describe it is not it. The concept that the symbol points to is not even it! Even though I am describing a concept, that isn't it.

It can be maddening if you take it too seriously, but that is the nature of the Cosmic Joke.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
UnStupendousMan
Posts: 3,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2012 7:33:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Soo... We cannot say that 1=1? [To be noted: I do not know a whole lot about philosophy, so I probably missed a lot of what the OP said.]
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2012 7:37:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The duality of the human cognitive process is apparent in how we structure society, how we determine knowledge, how we approach art, how we judge, etc.

Anyway, discuss this subject, I'm interested in hearing DDO's take on it.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2012 7:39:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/24/2012 7:33:34 PM, UnStupendousMan wrote:
Soo... We cannot say that 1=1? [To be noted: I do not know a whole lot about philosophy, so I probably missed a lot of what the OP said.]

By the rules determined by mathematics, you could... but er... talk to a high level math professor type, and things could get hairier.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2012 10:13:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Seriously? No one has anything to say about this? Comments questions, or even attempts to refute?
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2012 4:39:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/24/2012 7:27:38 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
The human mind is constructed in such a way that we are incapable of grasping or understanding anything without comparing the thought to something else.

These are the grids we place over reality, the measuring sticks, etc. Our little code breaking systems that align just right if the spacing is calibrated correctly... well, ALMOST just right.

The thing is, the thing is, our cognitive handicap coupled with the limitations of our perception effectively make it impossible to be completely right, or even TRULY objective. We can only be objective from a relative standpoint, or in other words, something can only ve true based on the rules, criteria, and concepts that we use to make up the game. The measuring stick, the grid. Even the concept of "objective truth" is determined by criteria, rules, concepts, which themselves arrise out the dualistic mind. Our entire language is plagued by this, and to make matters more chaotic, no one truly has the same grasp of linguistics, and there are other non-verbal non-written factors that play into the picture. We are very ineffective communicators by nature, and it is our curse.

The duality is an illusion created by the mind. There is one, but it is none, and it is infinite. It is where everything comes, goes, and is. It was called God once, but people believed in the symbol, not the duality. The word used to describe it is not it. The concept that the symbol points to is not even it! Even though I am describing a concept, that isn't it.

It can be maddening if you take it too seriously, but that is the nature of the Cosmic Joke.

Which of the following are you claiming:

The human mind is such that when we attempt to grasp something, we innately cognize it by comparing it to other things.

or

The human mind is such that it cannot cognize without comparing the thought to other things.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2012 6:00:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
In a sense, I am claiming both. I understand how that may make what I'm saying come off as being even more absurd, but I am not the exception to any of this.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2012 7:55:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/24/2012 7:27:38 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
The human mind is constructed in such a way that we are incapable of grasping or understanding anything without comparing the thought to something else.

These are the grids we place over reality, the measuring sticks, etc. Our little code breaking systems that align just right if the spacing is calibrated correctly... well, ALMOST just right.

The thing is, the thing is, our cognitive handicap coupled with the limitations of our perception effectively make it impossible to be completely right, or even TRULY objective. We can only be objective from a relative standpoint, or in other words, something can only ve true based on the rules, criteria, and concepts that we use to make up the game. The measuring stick, the grid. Even the concept of "objective truth" is determined by criteria, rules, concepts, which themselves arrise out the dualistic mind. Our entire language is plagued by this, and to make matters more chaotic, no one truly has the same grasp of linguistics, and there are other non-verbal non-written factors that play into the picture. We are very ineffective communicators by nature, and it is our curse.

The duality is an illusion created by the mind. There is one, but it is none, and it is infinite. It is where everything comes, goes, and is. It was called God once, but people believed in the symbol, not the duality. The word used to describe it is not it. The concept that the symbol points to is not even it! Even though I am describing a concept, that isn't it.

It can be maddening if you take it too seriously, but that is the nature of the Cosmic Joke.

I consider that an anachronistic way of thinking. Sure, back in the day when a different continent may have been a different planet, natural disasters were simply "acts of God," and then Sun was some sentient entity that may simply walk away one day if we pss it off, our knowledge we limited to comparisons we can make with our own limited experiences.

However, we now realize that different continents are actually parts of the same land mass that emerges above the surface of the ocean and rests upon a series of fluctuating plates; natural disasters are due to weather anomalies or disturbances due to interactions between thermohaline circulation, interactions with objects in our solar system producing gravity fields that manifest the tides, the magnetic field of the the Earth and objects around it, and the pressure resulting from the combination of temperatures and gasses in our atmosphere; and we know that the sun is actually an average-sizes star comprised of highly volatile plasma in an arrangement so dense, it is in a constant state of nuclear fission to remain alive, with at least two siblings within a few hundred lightyears.

Those are not comparisons.

That is knowledge so specific, in fact, we can't compare it to anything, and this is why I fancy some people may have a hard time understanding it.

On the other hand, I do agree that there comes a point where our understanding ends and the rest of the universe begins, and I also concede that "the rest of the universe" is probably infinite compared to our limited understanding. Nonetheless, that doesn't illegitimatize the knowledge we already have.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 7:51:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I never advocated an anti-science stance, and yes, everything you said and claimed still requires the comparing og something to something else. Think about it.

Certain grids we place around reality are more useful and even more accurate, but non of them are perfect, for the perfect grid is no grid at all.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 8:49:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/27/2012 7:51:46 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
I never advocated an anti-science stance, and yes, everything you said and claimed still requires the comparing og something to something else. Think about it.

Certain grids we place around reality are more useful and even more accurate, but non of them are perfect, for the perfect grid is no grid at all.

I see what you're driving at, but I can't get away from the circular nature of the argument. Moreover, there are concepts that don't require definition to which other concepts are compared.

For example, while playing an instrument, the notes aren't even codified visually or lingually in your head; instead, you simply "feel" the music by "expressing yourself" on an instrument. But, the reason why I don't consider those descriptions accurate is because those aren't concepts you ponder while making music; they are simply inadequate ways to describe them. The actual sensation of notes and music... beyond description.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 11:59:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
You still don't see how you are comparing things? Doesn't just have to be words, you know.

I'm not making an argument here, I am stating a factual observation that I believe to be self evident.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 6:15:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/27/2012 11:59:51 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
You still don't see how you are comparing things? Doesn't just have to be words, you know.

Nope.

I see no analogous translations in creating music from acoustic instruments. Care to explain?
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 7:34:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
You were speaking of the sensation of music now...

Indescribable as that may be, the senses themselves operate in a manner that compares. You know the feeling of making music. It is different than the feeling of not making music. You are comparing it to that.

Sounds that are dissonant to your ear are only that way because you compare it to what you feel to be consonant. If you work within certain keys, you are working within a particular grid. The mind operates in a way to where it is impossible to perceive without comparing, even if you aren't aware of what you are comparing to.

Even something alien is only perceived that way because you have the familiar to compare it to.

Now, I've heard of New Ager types hijacking this concept(like they tend to do), and perverting it until something completely nonsensical. Like, when the Europeans came to America in their sail ships, the natives could not see the ships because they were so alien to them. This is bs(so is that very popular movie amongst pseudo-intellectual types, and the uninformed, "what the *bleep* do we know?").

The fact is, what I'm describing is very mundane in nature, and is
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 7:41:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Something that is grappled with once you reach a high enough level in just about any field. Mathematicians play alot with this concept, which is why some higher level math just seems incomprehensibly absurd.

Philosophers have been aware of this at least since the Buddha, and it tends to get rediscovered every generation, because of the impossibility of communicating it.

It completely debunks the concept of naive realism, which can really flip someone's paradigm upside down. The problem is, it is very easy to make it sound ridiculous.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2012 10:57:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Nobody interested in this subject? Questions? Challenges? Acknowledgment?
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 1:24:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/29/2012 10:57:55 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Nobody interested in this subject? Questions? Challenges? Acknowledgment?

Nope, people only care about trivial things and lame topics like "end justify means" or whatever else is discussed in pop-philosophy circles.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 1:53:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/27/2012 11:59:51 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
I'm not making an argument here, I am stating a factual observation that I believe to be self evident.
Self-refutation is the opposite of self-evidence.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 2:13:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/27/2012 7:34:41 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
You were speaking of the sensation of music now...

Indescribable as that may be, the senses themselves operate in a manner that compares. You know the feeling of making music. It is different than the feeling of not making music. You are comparing it to that.

Sounds that are dissonant to your ear are only that way because you compare it to what you feel to be consonant. If you work within certain keys, you are working within a particular grid. The mind operates in a way to where it is impossible to perceive without comparing, even if you aren't aware of what you are comparing to.

Even something alien is only perceived that way because you have the familiar to compare it to.

Now, I've heard of New Ager types hijacking this concept(like they tend to do), and perverting it until something completely nonsensical. Like, when the Europeans came to America in their sail ships, the natives could not see the ships because they were so alien to them. This is bs(so is that very popular movie amongst pseudo-intellectual types, and the uninformed, "what the *bleep* do we know?").

The fact is, what I'm describing is very mundane in nature, and is

It honestly seems to me that you're reducing all thought processes to an acknowledgement of being versus nonbeing.

There are many suggestions behind your premise -- such as that it's impossible to know only one thing; it is only possible to learn things that have a relationship with something else you already know; that it is possible to know all things that are interrelated.

I completely disagree with all three premises. It is possible to cognitively know only one thing, if only for a few moments, as I'm sure occurs while we're a child during waking sentient sometime around toddlerhood; it is certainly possible to learn something new without comparing it to other things -- indeed, you presented no argument for how the physical realities I exemplified were comparisons, and in fact, it requires that you do no compare physics to what you already know, even about physics, to understand it; and, as proven by Godel, it is mathematically impossible to know all things that are interrelated.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 5:34:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 1:53:32 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/27/2012 11:59:51 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
I'm not making an argument here, I am stating a factual observation that I believe to be self evident.
Self-refutation is the opposite of self-evidence.

What I'm talking about can only be expressed in paradox. It is not truly self defeating.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2012 10:50:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/30/2012 5:34:57 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
At 1/30/2012 1:53:32 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/27/2012 11:59:51 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
I'm not making an argument here, I am stating a factual observation that I believe to be self evident.
Self-refutation is the opposite of self-evidence.

What I'm talking about can only be expressed in paradox. It is not truly self defeating.

Since it's an expression, such a limitation on its expression is indeed self-defeating.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 2:07:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Rag, you aren't getting what I'm saying, you are nitpicking semantics. If you understood what I was saying, you'd understand why it isn't effectively communicated.

The expression is just the finger pointing at a distant star. Are you looking at my finger or tge general direction of my pointing? Can you single out the star.

Ren, my phone is dying, I'll get back.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 3:41:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/31/2012 2:07:32 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Rag, you aren't getting what I'm saying, you are nitpicking semantics. If you understood what I was saying, you'd understand why it isn't effectively communicated.
You're putting the cart before the horse, you have to effectively communicate something for it to be "understood."
There has to be something for there to be a thing to understand, and in order for one to believe there is a something one needs evidence.


The expression is just the finger pointing at a distant star. Are you looking at my finger or tge general direction of my pointing? Can you single out the star.
This is the philosophy forum, the religion forum is that way -->
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 1:47:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
@Ren

I've got no disagreement with Godel, that is very much a statement of fact. Chaos theory deals a lot with this. Chaos theory is amazing in its philosophical implications. It is because it acknowledges the limitations of our perceptual capabilities and epistemology, yet also acknowledges the deterministic and inter-related nature of everything, it is at the same time the most fruitful and absurd studies in mathematics.

Anyway, I hope thiz addresses what you are saying, and clears any misunderstandings.
Like I said, I am a human being, and am still subject to thinking in a dualistic nature... However, i am not reducing things to "being and not being". If I did that, I'd probably be more of a nihilist who is in denial of the subjective world that exists. But it is close to the truth. The fact is, the way we perceive the world is not static, it isn't just one type of empty experience with no thought. The mind makes distinctions, it judges, and this is at the root of our cognitive process. That is how we work, and we can not operate in any other way. Even when the one, the none, and the infinite are understood to represent the way we perceive and make sense of the world, it doesn't change the fact that we don't have a choice but to operate like that. Even the concept doesn't accurately paint the picture, because our minds can not grasp it fully.. ever.

@Rag

I've repeatedly said that if you understand the thing I am talking about, you'd understand why it is nearly impossible to communicate. This is a meta-linguistic concept, it has to do with the very nature of how we communicate.

If I were to point at a single star in the sky amongst many, even if you looked in the direction of where I was pointing, you would not likely pick out the same star. This is not a condescending comment, it is an illustration. I'm talking philosophy. This isn't religion, this is a philosophical discussion regarding the concepts of perceptual dualism. Judging by your profile, you would be considered a naive realist. You don't understand enouvh about how your mind perceives and filters the world to get what I'm saying, because what I am saying is directly opposed to it. What you see is very obviously not what you get if you have an understanding of the way the mind works.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, and aren't making an honest attempt at establishing communication, you are wasting both of our time and I'd rather not engage you. I'll consider it if you pull your head out of your arse for a minute.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 2:22:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/31/2012 1:47:35 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
@Ren

I've got no disagreement with Godel, that is very much a statement of fact. Chaos theory deals a lot with this. Chaos theory is amazing in its philosophical implications. It is because it acknowledges the limitations of our perceptual capabilities and epistemology, yet also acknowledges the deterministic and inter-related nature of everything, it is at the same time the most fruitful and absurd studies in mathematics.


Anyway, I hope thiz addresses what you are saying, and clears any misunderstandings.
Like I said, I am a human being, and am still subject to thinking in a dualistic nature... However, i am not reducing things to "being and not being". If I did that, I'd probably be more of a nihilist who is in denial of the subjective world that exists. But it is close to the truth. The fact is, the way we perceive the world is not static, it isn't just one type of empty experience with no thought. The mind makes distinctions, it judges, and this is at the root of our cognitive process. That is how we work, and we can not operate in any other way. Even when the one, the none, and the infinite are understood to represent the way we perceive and make sense of the world, it doesn't change the fact that we don't have a choice but to operate like that. Even the concept doesn't accurately paint the picture, because our minds can not grasp it fully.. ever.

I see what you're saying.

For example, we don't see objects, we see the proportion of photos that shoot from them and enter our eyeballs. Then our optic nerves interpret the shape these photons make, as well as the density in this collection of photons, and presents these distinctions as images.

In effect, we're not seeing anything, but rather our interpretation of them based on analogous interactions with the forces they comprise.

Truth.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 3:55:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Thank you Ren for making the effort to understand what I'm saying. I think you are grasping it.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 5:03:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Now understanding this, you can really understand the difference between...

Subjectivity

Objective from a relative standpoint(what is commonly mistaken for being objective)

True Objectivity.

What most people think of as being objective is not taking subjectivity into account. This is why science is continuously changing and perfecting the grid.

It's like having 2 apples. 1 + 1 apples. You'd think that both being ones, tgey would be equal. In actuality, they aren't. When we measure an apple as being "1", we aren't actually measuring the apple, we are measuring the grid, the definition, or the concept.

We define an apple as having certain attributes. When an object fits these attributes, it aligns with the grid. We then call it an apple. In reality, there is no such thing as an apple. When we compare two apples, we are really comparing symbols.

Objectively from a relative standpoint, it is an apple. There are two apples. This is relative to the rules we have established.

The object of science is to find the grid that closest matches with actuality. We will never have the perfect grid, because there is none. However, it never hurts to strive for 99% accuracy, even if we never get there.

What I am saying can very easily be contorted into meaning something New Agey and anti-science, but it is not. All I'm doing is debunking naive realism. If what I'm saying is understood, it is obviously true.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 6:19:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/31/2012 1:47:35 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
@Rag

I've repeatedly said that if you understand the thing I am talking about, you'd understand why it is nearly impossible to communicate.
Repetition is not a logically relevant matter.

If I were to point at a single star in the sky amongst many, even if you looked in the direction of where I was pointing, you would not likely pick out the same star. This is not a condescending comment, it is an illustration. I'm talking philosophy. This isn't religion
Preferring analogy to the logically relevant is a feature of many mystical traditions.

Judging by your profile, you would be considered a naive realist. You don't understand enouvh about how your mind perceives and filters the world to get what I'm saying, because what I am saying is directly opposed to it. What you see is very obviously not what you get if you have an understanding of the way the mind works.
How would you have acquired such knowledge, assuming it were true?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 6:22:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The object of science is to find the grid that closest matches with actuality. We will never have the perfect grid
You can't compare to a thing unless you have sufficient access to it to compare, tautologically.

If you do not have access to something real, you cannot match a "grid" to it, any more than you can copy a stencil design to paper without some access to the stencil (sufficient to know what the design was).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 6:29:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/31/2012 2:22:10 PM, Ren wrote:
For example, we don't see objects, we see the proportion of photos that shoot from them and enter our eyeballs.
The process of vision creates images (photos? photons did you mean to say?). That process begins with an object. In the absence of the object it doesn't operate. The concept of "seeing the object" of course does not entail a literal transplant of the object into your mind, it entails exactly that-- detecting the object by means of the light bouncing off it. This concept can exist in greater or lesser resolution, due to varying access to scientific and other information, but the essence remains the same. If you haven't detected an "object," you won't detect anything, indeed, you simply won't detect, you won't think you've detected, etc. Nothing else sufficient for the phenomena known as "detection" is there.

In effect, we're not seeing anything, but rather our interpretation of them
You can't interpret a thing to which you have no access whatsoever. The thing you label "interpretation" is in fact the seeing, the perception; interpretation is a different step, conceptualization, the two are not to be confused.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 6:43:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
You don't understand what I'm saying. When did I say anything about not having access to reality? See, you have the retardex new age interpretation of what I'm saying.

I'm telling you that we aren't on the same page, but you are still trying to refute me. You aren't being honest. If you want to talk more in depth, re-read the thread, and ask me to clarify on the things you have a problem with or don't understand. I'm not going to speak to you in debate format. I'm stating the obvious, but it is only obvious if you comprehend.

It's simple communication, buddy.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp