Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"). Those kind of questions can be asked in the off-topic section.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Terrapin Station »

(Fixed the formatting:)
Nick_A wrote: April 12th, 2021, 9:16 am
There are no objective purposes, no objective qualities (in that good/bad/best/worst/etc. sense), no objective forms, essences, etc.
It's my opinion, in the sense of it being my view, BECAUSE it is a statement of facts.

You'd need to show any evidence otherwise (to attempt to support that there are objective purposes, etc.)

That Einstein felt how he felt isn't evidence of anything aside from how Einstein felt.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Nick_A wrote: April 12th, 2021, 9:36 am science [...] must become less reliant on the law of the EXCLUDED middle...
Pattern-chaser wrote: April 12th, 2021, 3:53 pm Abandoning binary thinking would be difficult for science, I think. Without the luxury of being able to say "we have proven that X cannot be TRUE, so we can conclude that X is FALSE", science will flounder. What you propose requires the creation of a new discipline of philosophy; science cannot do it today, nor can it change so as to do it tomorrow, without becoming something that is no longer science. The change you propose is truly fundamental.
Nick_A wrote: April 12th, 2021, 8:43 pm Is there any reason other than habit to prevent science from expanding its horizons and not remain limited by dualism? It takes time. Old habits die hard. Think how long it took for people to admit the world is round? It will take at least that long for science to admit the third dimension of thought which brings objective value to dualism.

Your aims would transform science ... back into philosophy again! Science was originally a tool created by philosophers of a particular bent (analytic, etc). It started off with all the questions that philosophy can address - which is basically all matters to which serious, structured, thought can usefully be applied - and it sharpened its focus. They optimised their tool to address the easier questions, the ones for which sufficient evidence existed for rigorous logical analysis to be possible. The result of this optimisation was that, for those questions that it could address, it was much more powerful than philosophy. The downside is that there are questions it could not, and can not, address. Swings and roundabouts....

Now you want to expand science to address these other matters, which would, as I started off by saying, change it back into philosophy again. In doing so, you would also take from science its optimised 'super-powers', and deprive us of a very valuable tool that has proved its worth over many centuries. Philosophy already does what you want science to do.

One final point: it isn't trinary logic that we need to master - "the third dimension of thought" - it's that we need to drop binary thinking, or dualism, as you call it. Many matters feature MORE than three possible outcomes. It's the dualism we need to lose, in favour of 'multi-valued' logic.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Nick_A »

P-C
Your aims would transform science ... back into philosophy again! Science was originally a tool created by philosophers of a particular bent (analytic, etc). It started off with all the questions that philosophy can address - which is basically all matters to which serious, structured, thought can usefully be applied - and it sharpened its focus. They optimised their tool to address the easier questions, the ones for which sufficient evidence existed for rigorous logical analysis to be possible. The result of this optimisation was that, for those questions that it could address, it was much more powerful than philosophy. The downside is that there are questions it could not, and can not, address. Swings and roundabouts....

Now you want to expand science to address these other matters, which would, as I started off by saying, change it back into philosophy again. In doing so, you would also take from science its optimised 'super-powers', and deprive us of a very valuable tool that has proved its worth over many centuries. Philosophy already does what you want science to do.
You've misunderstood me. The Law of the INCLUDED Middle doesn't replace the Law of the EXCLUDED Middle. They are complimentary and they enable a person to put the study of particulars into the human conscious perspective of wholeness which we lack. Here is a simple explanation of the INCLUDED middle followed by a more scientific explanation by Basarab Nicolescu

https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27 ... %20not%2DA).

https://ciret-transdisciplinarity.org/b ... %20non%2DA.

From the first link:
Included Middle is an idea proposed by Stéphane Lupasco (in The Principle of Antagonism and the Logic of Energy in 1951), further developed by Joseph E. Brenner and Basarab Nicolescu, and also supported by Werner Heisenberg. The notion pertains to physics and quantum mechanics, and may have wider application in other domains such as information theory and computing, epistemology, and theories of consciousness.
A and not A are mutually exclusive as seen in the excluded middle yet can become one or reconciled from a higher level of reality by the law of the included middle. Is Man capable of becoming able to put objective facts made possible by the law of the excluded middle into a higher conscious human perspective through the law of the included middle? It already is for some and maybe that is all that can be expected as the battle over opinions remains dominant.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Nick_A »

Terrapin Station wrote: April 13th, 2021, 6:48 am (Fixed the formatting:)
Nick_A wrote: April 12th, 2021, 9:16 am
There are no objective purposes, no objective qualities (in that good/bad/best/worst/etc. sense), no objective forms, essences, etc.
It's my opinion, in the sense of it being my view, BECAUSE it is a statement of facts.

You'd need to show any evidence otherwise (to attempt to support that there are objective purposes, etc.)

That Einstein felt how he felt isn't evidence of anything aside from how Einstein felt.
So you do not believe in the ream of truth and convinced the future of Man is the eternal battle on the Ship of Fools over dominating opinions.

Was Simone Weil's need for truth nothing but fantasy.
I did not mind having no visible successes, but what did grieve me was the idea of being excluded from that transcendent kingdom to which only the truly great have access and wherein truth abides. I preferred to die rather than live without that truth.


Is the inner calling to experience truth just egoistic fantasy so has never been experienced? That may be your opinion but does that mean you could never experientially "KNOW"?
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Terrapin Station »

Nick_A wrote: April 13th, 2021, 11:59 am So you do not believe in the ream of truth and convinced the future of Man is the eternal battle on the Ship of Fools over dominating opinions.
I don't really know what "the realm of truth" is supposed to refer to.

I have no problem with truth-value. It's a property of propositions (that on my view obtains via someone making a judgment about the relationship of a proposition to something else (such as observed states of affairs, for example)).

But some things, like ethical utterances, are not true or false on my view. They're simply ways that people feel--dispositions or preferences they have--about interpersonal behavior.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Nick_A »

T S
I don't really know what "the realm of truth" is supposed to refer to.
Consider Diotima's ladder of love and how it connects the particular to the universal or the ream of truth. Does it make sense to you?
Diotima maps out the stages in this ascent in terms of what sort of beautiful thing the lover desires and is drawn toward.

A particular beautiful body. This is the starting point, when love, which by definition is a desire for something we don’t have, is first aroused by the sight of individual beauty.

All beautiful bodies. According to standard Platonic doctrine, all beautiful bodies share something in common, something the lover eventually comes to recognize. When he does recognize this, he moves beyond a passion for any particular body.
Beautiful souls. Next, the lover comes to realize that spiritual and moral beauty matters much more than physical beauty. So he will now yearn for the sort of interaction with noble characters that will help him become a better person.

Beautiful laws and institutions. These are created by good people (beautiful souls) and are the conditions which foster moral beauty.

The beauty of knowledge. The lover turns his attention to all kinds of knowledge, but particularly, in the end to philosophical understanding. (Although the reason for this turn isn’t stated, it is presumably because philosophical wisdom is what underpins good laws and institutions.)

Beauty itself – that is, the Form of the Beautiful. This is described as "an everlasting loveliness which neither comes nor goes, which neither flowers nor fades." It is the very essence of beauty, "subsisting of itself and by itself in an eternal oneness." And every particular beautiful thing is beautiful because of its connection to this Form. The lover who has ascended the ladder apprehends the Form of Beauty in a kind of vision or revelation, not through words or in the way that other sorts of more ordinary knowledge are known.

Diotima tells Socrates that if he ever reached the highest rung on the ladder and contemplated the Form of Beauty, he would never again be seduced by the physical attractions of beautiful youths. Nothing could make life more worth living than enjoying this sort of vision. Because the Form of Beauty is perfect, it will inspire perfect virtue in those who contemplate it.
The ladder is a metaphor for the ascent a lover might make from purely physical attraction to something beautiful, as a beautiful body, the lowest rung, to actual contemplation of the Form of Beauty itself.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7089
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Sculptor1 »

Nick_A wrote: April 9th, 2021, 4:58 pm Opinion is the medium between knowledge and ignorance. ~ Plato

Modern philosophy is the endless debate between opinions. But can a person experience knowledge by transcending our reliance on opinions?

Plato explains our four cognitive states:

Noesis (immediate intuition, apprehension, or mental 'seeing' of principles)

Dianoia (discursive thought)

Pistis (belief or confidence)

Eikasia (delusion or sheer conjecture)


Eikasia, Pistis, and Dianoia, create the opinions of our senses in the visible world. But noesis is the experience of the greater reality of the intellectual realm above what our senses can experience.
This is exactly where Plato was dead wrong.
People are wrong all the time with their intuitions, and onoy a fool would rely on them alone.
Has anyone experienced it? Apparently Einstein did and explains why he believes it more valuable than dianoia.
1930
"Many people think that the progress of the human race is based on experiences of an empirical, critical nature, but I say that true knowledge is to be had only through a philosophy of deduction. For it is intuition that improves the world, not just following the trodden path of thought. Intuition makes us look at unrelated facts and then think about them until they can all be brought under one law. To look for related facts means holding onto what one has instead of searching for new facts. Intuition is the father of new knowledge, while empiricism is nothing but an accumulation of old knowledge. Intuition, not intellect, is the ‘open sesame’ of yourself." -- Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 16.), conversation March 4, 1930
Philosophers argue opinions. But how many have the quality of consciousness and the ability for conscious attention essential to experience noesis or intuition? When we cannot, and deny its value, aren't our opinions just ignorance we defend in pursuit of wisdom and the aim of philosophy.
It is true that light bulb moments tend to be amongst the moments that lead to great ideas and "reveleations", but unless they are tested by empirical evidence and discussion, theory and consualtation with other known areas of knoweldge they are most usually wrong.
Humans are great for forgetting light bulb moments that turn out to be crap ideas and great at remembering successful notions that turn out well.

When these moments are at their best, I imagaine that the unconcscious mind is working on problems. People who get great ideas, and solutions have already done their homework.
Garbage in Garbage out. Indolence is rarely rewarded with intiutions of good worth.

I suggest we all know this phenomenon. Sleep on it and you will have your solution. FOrget about the problem for a while and the solution will suggest itself. How many times have you heard these phrases.
But I must insist that Noesis, is not god given or divine grace, but the ordinary workings of a mind of a person that is fully engaged in their activities.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Nick_A »

Sculptor1 wrote: April 14th, 2021, 11:27 am
Nick_A wrote: April 9th, 2021, 4:58 pm Opinion is the medium between knowledge and ignorance. ~ Plato

Modern philosophy is the endless debate between opinions. But can a person experience knowledge by transcending our reliance on opinions?

Plato explains our four cognitive states:

Noesis (immediate intuition, apprehension, or mental 'seeing' of principles)

Dianoia (discursive thought)

Pistis (belief or confidence)

Eikasia (delusion or sheer conjecture)


Eikasia, Pistis, and Dianoia, create the opinions of our senses in the visible world. But noesis is the experience of the greater reality of the intellectual realm above what our senses can experience.
This is exactly where Plato was dead wrong.
People are wrong all the time with their intuitions, and onoy a fool would rely on them alone.
Has anyone experienced it? Apparently Einstein did and explains why he believes it more valuable than dianoia.
1930
"Many people think that the progress of the human race is based on experiences of an empirical, critical nature, but I say that true knowledge is to be had only through a philosophy of deduction. For it is intuition that improves the world, not just following the trodden path of thought. Intuition makes us look at unrelated facts and then think about them until they can all be brought under one law. To look for related facts means holding onto what one has instead of searching for new facts. Intuition is the father of new knowledge, while empiricism is nothing but an accumulation of old knowledge. Intuition, not intellect, is the ‘open sesame’ of yourself." -- Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 16.), conversation March 4, 1930
Philosophers argue opinions. But how many have the quality of consciousness and the ability for conscious attention essential to experience noesis or intuition? When we cannot, and deny its value, aren't our opinions just ignorance we defend in pursuit of wisdom and the aim of philosophy.
It is true that light bulb moments tend to be amongst the moments that lead to great ideas and "reveleations", but unless they are tested by empirical evidence and discussion, theory and consualtation with other known areas of knoweldge they are most usually wrong.
Humans are great for forgetting light bulb moments that turn out to be crap ideas and great at remembering successful notions that turn out well.

When these moments are at their best, I imagaine that the unconcscious mind is working on problems. People who get great ideas, and solutions have already done their homework.
Garbage in Garbage out. Indolence is rarely rewarded with intiutions of good worth.

I suggest we all know this phenomenon. Sleep on it and you will have your solution. FOrget about the problem for a while and the solution will suggest itself. How many times have you heard these phrases.
But I must insist that Noesis, is not god given or divine grace, but the ordinary workings of a mind of a person that is fully engaged in their activities.
Einstein is describing anamnesis or the process of remembering what has been forgotten. But when we are so attached to the shadows on the wall and habitual thinking, who can remember what has been forgotten?

At the same time, do not confuse eikasia (delusion or sheer conjecture), with noesis or the (immediate intuition, apprehension, or mental 'seeing' of principles). A person can often eventually come to see when they are BSing themselves. If they can't they my go mad.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Terrapin Station »

Nick_A wrote: April 14th, 2021, 11:12 am T S
I don't really know what "the realm of truth" is supposed to refer to.
Consider Diotima's ladder of love and how it connects the particular to the universal or the ream of truth. Does it make sense to you?
Again, I don't buy that there are universals (or forms) in that sense. I'm a nominalist. Universals are simply abstractions in individuals' minds. It's a way that an individual can think about particulars, with respect to similarities that matter to them, etc.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7089
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Sculptor1 »

Nick_A wrote: April 14th, 2021, 2:57 pm
Sculptor1 wrote: April 14th, 2021, 11:27 am
Nick_A wrote: April 9th, 2021, 4:58 pm Opinion is the medium between knowledge and ignorance. ~ Plato

Modern philosophy is the endless debate between opinions. But can a person experience knowledge by transcending our reliance on opinions?

Plato explains our four cognitive states:

Noesis (immediate intuition, apprehension, or mental 'seeing' of principles)

Dianoia (discursive thought)

Pistis (belief or confidence)

Eikasia (delusion or sheer conjecture)


Eikasia, Pistis, and Dianoia, create the opinions of our senses in the visible world. But noesis is the experience of the greater reality of the intellectual realm above what our senses can experience.
This is exactly where Plato was dead wrong.
People are wrong all the time with their intuitions, and onoy a fool would rely on them alone.
Has anyone experienced it? Apparently Einstein did and explains why he believes it more valuable than dianoia.
1930
"Many people think that the progress of the human race is based on experiences of an empirical, critical nature, but I say that true knowledge is to be had only through a philosophy of deduction. For it is intuition that improves the world, not just following the trodden path of thought. Intuition makes us look at unrelated facts and then think about them until they can all be brought under one law. To look for related facts means holding onto what one has instead of searching for new facts. Intuition is the father of new knowledge, while empiricism is nothing but an accumulation of old knowledge. Intuition, not intellect, is the ‘open sesame’ of yourself." -- Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 16.), conversation March 4, 1930
Philosophers argue opinions. But how many have the quality of consciousness and the ability for conscious attention essential to experience noesis or intuition? When we cannot, and deny its value, aren't our opinions just ignorance we defend in pursuit of wisdom and the aim of philosophy.
It is true that light bulb moments tend to be amongst the moments that lead to great ideas and "reveleations", but unless they are tested by empirical evidence and discussion, theory and consualtation with other known areas of knoweldge they are most usually wrong.
Humans are great for forgetting light bulb moments that turn out to be crap ideas and great at remembering successful notions that turn out well.

When these moments are at their best, I imagaine that the unconcscious mind is working on problems. People who get great ideas, and solutions have already done their homework.
Garbage in Garbage out. Indolence is rarely rewarded with intiutions of good worth.

I suggest we all know this phenomenon. Sleep on it and you will have your solution. FOrget about the problem for a while and the solution will suggest itself. How many times have you heard these phrases.
But I must insist that Noesis, is not god given or divine grace, but the ordinary workings of a mind of a person that is fully engaged in their activities.
Einstein is describing anamnesis or the process of remembering what has been forgotten. But when we are so attached to the shadows on the wall and habitual thinking, who can remember what has been forgotten?
Einstein said no such thing.

At the same time, do not confuse eikasia (delusion or sheer conjecture), with noesis or the (immediate intuition, apprehension, or mental 'seeing' of principles). A person can often eventually come to see when they are BSing themselves. If they can't they my go mad.
Noesis does not exist. It's just a theory.
Plato was ignorant of modern psychology and understood very little about how we understand.
It's a shame you did not bother to read what I said.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Nick_A »

S1
Noesis does not exist. It's just a theory.
Plato was ignorant of modern psychology and understood very little about how we understand.
It's a shame you did not bother to read what I said.
I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. May I not reply with a parable? The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's Pantheism. I admire even more his contributions to modern thought. Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.” Einstein
If the Universe has a purpose beyond the limitations of the dialectic to grasp, and it is ever to be understood, it must come from noesis. Without it you can only hope to have an objectively meaningless existence with meaning supplied by the many opinions of society.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Terrapin Station »

Nick_A wrote: April 14th, 2021, 7:42 pm S1
Noesis does not exist. It's just a theory.
Plato was ignorant of modern psychology and understood very little about how we understand.
It's a shame you did not bother to read what I said.
I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. May I not reply with a parable? The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's Pantheism. I admire even more his contributions to modern thought. Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.” Einstein
If the Universe has a purpose beyond the limitations of the dialectic to grasp, and it is ever to be understood, it must come from noesis. Without it you can only hope to have an objectively meaningless existence with meaning supplied by the many opinions of society.
Which is what's the case. Things are objectively meaningless (objectivity is a category error for meaning, after all). Any meaning is supplied not by "opinions of society"--societies don't literally have minds/think, but by the dispositions, opinions, preferences, etc. of individuals, including yourself. This shouldn't be upsetting to anyone. It should be rather enlightening/liberating.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Steve3007 »

1930
"Many people think that the progress of the human race is based on experiences of an empirical, critical nature, but I say that true knowledge is to be had only through a philosophy of deduction. For it is intuition that improves the world, not just following the trodden path of thought. Intuition makes us look at unrelated facts and then think about them until they can all be brought under one law. To look for related facts means holding onto what one has instead of searching for new facts. Intuition is the father of new knowledge, while empiricism is nothing but an accumulation of old knowledge. Intuition, not intellect, is the ‘open sesame’ of yourself." -- Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 16.), conversation March 4, 1930
It seems to me that Einstein was simply talking about the process of making novel connections between seemingly diverse empirical observations (and things that are based on those observations) - Eureka moments. That means making connections that have not been made before, like (in his case) the connections between the speed of light, Maxwell's equations and Galilean relativity.

Where the inspiration for these connections comes from is perhaps the interesting question. We could speculate that, at least in the case of the sorts of things Einstein thought about, their ultimate source was the fact that our brains are made from the same stuff that the connections are about. We are the product of millions of years of evolution within, and therefore intimate connection with, the universe about which the connections are made.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Steve3007 wrote: April 15th, 2021, 11:29 am Where the inspiration for these connections comes from is perhaps the interesting question.

Isn't this where we employ concepts like creativity and imagination? It's the ability that allows artists of all sorts (poets, designers, painters, etc) to create what they do. If you read up on creativity, it seems we recognise two types. I think they're called "convergent" and "divergent". One is the one that Tracy Emin has, and the other is the one that many autists (myself included) have. The latter enabled my career as a software designer. But I utterly lack the former, sadly. 😉
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Ignorance, Opinions, and Knowledge

Post by Steve3007 »

Pattern-chaser wrote:Isn't this where we employ concepts like creativity and imagination? It's the ability that allows artists of all sorts (poets, designers, painters, etc) to create what they do.
Yes. I was just speculating vaguely as to the origins of the kinds of creativity that lead to "Eureka moments" on the sorts of subjects that Einstein was interested in.
If you read up on creativity, it seems we recognise two types. I think they're called "convergent" and "divergent". One is the one that Tracy Emin has, and the other is the one that many autists (myself included) have. The latter enabled my career as a software designer. But I utterly lack the former, sadly. 😉
Interesting. I don't think I've really looked into that difference before.
Post Reply

Return to “General Philosophy”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021