Happy New Year! The January Philosophy Book of the Month is The Runaway Species. Discuss it now.

The February Philosophy Book of the Month is The Fourth Age by Byron Reese (Nominated by RJG.)

Limits of Imagination

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
User avatar
JamesOfSeattle
Posts: 505
Joined: October 16th, 2015, 11:20 pm

Re: Limits of Imagination

Post by JamesOfSeattle » November 18th, 2018, 2:13 pm

Consul wrote:
July 8th, 2018, 2:21 pm
I don't think intentions are reducible to desires, urges, or drives, because I can intend to do what I don't desire to do, and I can intentionally do something without feeling an urge or drive to do it.
I agree that intentions are not reducible to desires. In fact to the contrary, intentions are the basis of creating urges and desires, although you may want to call them meta-urges, meta-desires, as the intentions themselves are likely the results of more basic urges/desires. Thus, my desire for food may result in an intention to get to the apple up in the tree. This intention may generate the urge to go get a ladder.

*

User avatar
JamesOfSeattle
Posts: 505
Joined: October 16th, 2015, 11:20 pm

Re: Limits of Imagination

Post by JamesOfSeattle » November 18th, 2018, 2:37 pm

mr533473 wrote:
July 2nd, 2018, 4:55 am
The question is if anyone feels their imagination capable of forming an idea that has not compounded, transposed, augmented or diminished materials afforded them by the senses and experience?
Simple answer is no, all ideas are the results of combinations of prior sense and experience, but that does not create a limit on forming any ideas. The key to human imagination is the ability to combine concepts arbitrarily. Given that, there is no idea that cannot be gotten to.

*

User avatar
RJG
Moderator
Posts: 1181
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Limits of Imagination

Post by RJG » November 19th, 2018, 2:56 pm

Consul wrote:...because I can intend to do what I don't desire to do…
This is logically impossible (self-defeating).

Firstly, "intending" implies "desiring/wanting". Intending without the 'desire' or the 'want-to' defies the very meaning of intending. Without the desire to intend, then the action is merely "un-intentional" or "non-intentional". Again, intent implies want; without the want, there can be no intent.

Secondly, and to put it simply… It is impossible for us to want-ingly do (or to intend) what we don't 'want' to do. ...as we can't possibly do what we don't want to do without first WANTING to do so!!!

As Schopenhauer so eloquently stated:
"A man can do as he wants, but cannot want what he wants" -- Arthur Schopenhauer

RJG translation: "One cannot want what they want (or don't want!) without the 'prior' want to do so."

Consul wrote:...and I can intentionally do something without feeling an urge or drive to do it.
Not possible. Just ask yourself, -- what is the difference between "intentionally doing something" and just "doing something"? ...isn't it the desire/want (i.e. the 'urge') to do it?

JamesOfSeattle wrote:I agree that intentions are not reducible to desires. In fact to the contrary, intentions are the basis of creating urges and desires, although you may want to call them meta-urges, meta-desires, as the intentions themselves are likely the results of more basic urges/desires. Thus, my desire for food may result in an intention to get to the apple up in the tree. This intention may generate the urge to go get a ladder.
Firstly, it is impossible to intentionally create one's urges and desires. [refer to Schopenhauer quote]. And secondly, since, one cannot intend their intentions, without the 'prior' intention to do so, "intentions" are therefore just 'passive' experiences (i.e. felt "urges").

One cannot "intentionally" do anything. One can only experience the intention (urge) to do something. ...any other interpretation defeats itself.

User avatar
cavacava
Posts: 49
Joined: October 12th, 2018, 11:10 am

Re: Limits of Imagination

Post by cavacava » November 21st, 2018, 2:44 pm

Language can describe countless things in countless ways, each way can be novel but the thing described is what it is. I think this limits creativity to the extent that does not make sense to discuss what can not be described by language.

I also think that it is possible to feel within thought, things that can't be adequately expressed in ordinary written language. Novelty that can be conveyed by the emotive power in or implied by works such as fine art, moral behavior, and perhaps psychology. Maybe why Plato wrote dialogues. Things which stun us, which are novel. The force or power of this kind of experience is typically lost in description.

User avatar
JamesOfSeattle
Posts: 505
Joined: October 16th, 2015, 11:20 pm

Re: Limits of Imagination

Post by JamesOfSeattle » November 21st, 2018, 5:14 pm

RJG wrote:
November 19th, 2018, 2:56 pm
Consul wrote:...because I can intend to do what I don't desire to do…
This is logically impossible (self-defeating).
Actually it’s not logically impossible, it’s just incomplete. What’s being described is competing desires, one of which (at least) is driven by intention.
As Schopenhauer so eloquently stated:
"A man can do as he wants, but cannot want what he wants" -- Arthur Schopenhauer
There’s a good chance Schopenhauer is mistaken. People can change what they want, although they can’t (usually?) do it instantaneously.
JamesOfSeattle wrote:I agree that intentions are not reducible to desires. In fact to the contrary, intentions are the basis of creating urges and desires, although you may want to call them meta-urges, meta-desires, as the intentions themselves are likely the results of more basic urges/desires. Thus, my desire for food may result in an intention to get to the apple up in the tree. This intention may generate the urge to go get a ladder.
Firstly, it is impossible to intentionally create one's urges and desires. [refer to Schopenhauer quote]. And secondly, since, one cannot intend their intentions, without the 'prior' intention to do so, "intentions" are therefore just 'passive' experiences (i.e. felt "urges").

One cannot "intentionally" do anything. One can only experience the intention (urge) to do something. ...any other interpretation defeats itself.
I kinda think you’re brutalizing the word “intention” here. Obviously there is a difference between accidentally knocking a glass off a table and intentionally doing so.

Suppose I say “give me something to do”, and you say “move that chair one foot to the left”, and I move towards that chair with the intention to move it to the left, at what point did I develop the urge to move the chair to the left?

*

User avatar
RJG
Moderator
Posts: 1181
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Limits of Imagination

Post by RJG » November 21st, 2018, 11:50 pm

JamesOfSeattle wrote:Actually it’s not logically impossible, it’s just incomplete. What’s being described is competing desires, one of which (at least) is driven by intention.
It is not the "competing" desire, but the 'preceding' desire, that makes it logically impossible for us to do other than what we desire/intend.

And since it is impossible to do other than what we desire (as we would first have to have that desire to do so), then we are left with no option to do anything other than what our desires dictate.

Schopenhauer wrote:"A man can do as he wants, but cannot want what he wants" -- Arthur Schopenhauer
JamesOfSeattle wrote:There’s a good chance Schopenhauer is mistaken.
Logically it is sound. Schopenhauer makes the same point (as I do above), that it is logically impossible to defy our desires, because there is always a 'preceding' desire/want to any action we may take.

JamesOfSeattle wrote:People can change what they want…
...only if they WANT to, i.e. only if there is a pre-existing (preceding) want to do so. This 'preceding' want makes it impossible for us to ever truly choose/select our own wants and actions resulting from these wants.

RJG wrote:Firstly, it is impossible to intentionally create one's urges and desires. [refer to Schopenhauer quote]. And secondly, since, one cannot intend their intentions, without the 'prior' intention to do so, "intentions" are therefore just 'passive' experiences (i.e. felt "urges").

One cannot "intentionally" do anything. One can only experience the intention (urge) to do something. ...any other interpretation [logically] defeats itself.
JamesOfSeattle wrote:I kinda think you’re brutalizing the word “intention” here. Obviously there is a difference between accidentally knocking a glass off a table and intentionally doing so.

Suppose I say “give me something to do”, and you say “move that chair one foot to the left”, and I move towards that chair with the intention to move it to the left, at what point did I develop the urge to move the chair to the left?
You never "developed" the urge. You only 'experienced' the urge.

Unfortunately, it is logically impossible for us to ever "develop" (cause, control, or choose) our own urges/wants/desires. Contrary to popular belief, these urges/desires/wants control us, ...we don't control them.

BigBango
Posts: 165
Joined: March 15th, 2018, 6:15 pm

Re: Limits of Imagination

Post by BigBango » November 22nd, 2018, 12:36 am

I think the problem here is a failure to recognize the full extent of our metaphysical nature. We have a genetic disposition instantiated in our being that predisposes us to prefer certain outcomes. However, we also have instantiated in our being an overlord that judges those feelings against its own measure of relevance. We are not simply victims of our base desires but we are captains of their relevance..

Post Reply