The March Philosophy Book of the Month is Final Notice by Van Fleisher. Discuss Final Notice now.

The April Philosophy Book of the Month is The Unbound Soul by Richard L. Haight. Discuss The Unbound Soul Now

The May Philosophy Book of the Month is Misreading Judas by Robert Wahler.

How does one find True Knowledge?

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Eduk » December 5th, 2018, 9:34 am

Sorry I'm not familiar with your notation at all, I was just guessing at where the operators should be.

So what you are saying is that consciousness is an effect which is caused?
But consciousness cannot itself cause an effect?

I was under the impression that a cause causes an effect and then the effect becomes the next cause, and so on. Why does consciousness not do this?

Can you think of any other effects which don't become causes?
Unknown means unknown.

User avatar
RJG
Moderator
Posts: 1417
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by RJG » December 5th, 2018, 9:56 am

Eduk, an example is a shadow. A shadow can only follow, is always 'after' the action, never the causer of the action.

Consciousness and shadows are 'after'-effects.

Tamminen
Posts: 1147
Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Tamminen » December 5th, 2018, 10:14 am

The subject receives the material for its concrete existence from outside. It receives perceptions of the world and so on. But it also receives the way it happens to be in relation to the world: it receives its body. Therefore the body is something totally different than the subject, being part of the world it confronts.

The subject is never satisfied. It is not satisfied with its body, knowing that it could have had another kind of body. It is not satisfied with its personal history, knowing that it could have had another history, being born into happier conditions for instance.

The subject is a rebel. It rebels against its life and it rebels against its death. The subject transcends its concrete existence. This is one more reason to call it transcendental.

Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Eduk » December 5th, 2018, 10:34 am

Eduk, an example is a shadow. A shadow can only follow, is always 'after' the action, never the causer of the action.
A shadow isn't an effect, it's the lack of an effect. If I stop shinning a light on something it doesn't have the effect of getting less light.
Unknown means unknown.

User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3037
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Burning ghost » December 5th, 2018, 11:51 am

Eduk wrote:
December 5th, 2018, 5:37 am
@Burning ghost I know what memory is normatively and I don't have issue with your description, as it is, but that's not really what I was asking. You are doing the equivalent of showing me a hole and then asking me to make a shovel when neither of us knows what a shovel is.
I don’t understand that analogy. I was just stating loud and clear that I know what memory is. You addressed RJG and he’ll evade as usual and/or repeat himself (don’t even need to read his reply).

I think humans “think” and “intend,” I therefore have no issue with “memory.” Of course saying that humans cannot “think” or “intend” yet they have “memories” is utterly nonsensical.

I was simply trying to highlight “emotions” as the point. What is normative is what we experience - in the sense that we attend to the emotional value of the “now,” the “then” and the “will be” to different extents.

I am most certainly not going to say “shovel” is it has no meaning. Once it is said though it expresses something in some manner and you’ll interpret it as you interpret it due to your circumstances. If however you merely meant I was asking you to create a “tool” to achieve the “hole” I am sure you’d come up with something “shovel-like” (or more likley “spade-like”) without wasting too much brain power.
AKA badgerjelly

Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Eduk » December 5th, 2018, 12:11 pm

apologies @Burning ghost I don't think my point was clear. You said
It is probably best to view “remembering” as a means to navigate the world more effectively.
Now to my shovel analogy. If I said a shovel is
1. a tool for digging, lifting, and moving bulk materials, such as soil, coal, gravel, snow, sand, or ore.
That is true. But I can also go on and say most shovels
2. are hand tools consisting of a broad blade fixed to a medium-length handle.

I am trying to say that your description is akin to point 1 but not akin to point 2. I want to know what memory is, not what it is for (well both would be good).
Unknown means unknown.

Tamminen
Posts: 1147
Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Tamminen » December 5th, 2018, 12:13 pm

It is possible that the subject cannot act spontaneously. But when it responds to what it receives – and it has to respond according to its internal nature - the content of that response is what we call consciousness in its basic form. The response and its content constitute a unified totality and there is no sense in saying that the content is temporally before the responding. This totality is the basic unit of subjective time. So for instance my perception of a tree cannot be temporally separated from my perceiving it. Only the physical chain of events - light waves coming from the tree through my eyes to my brain - has a causal and temporal succession. Subjective past only comes to play when I reflect on my perception. In this sense consciousness in its basic form does not presuppose memory.

User avatar
RJG
Moderator
Posts: 1417
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by RJG » December 5th, 2018, 12:44 pm

RJG wrote:Eduk, an example is a shadow. A shadow can only follow, is always 'after' the action, never the causer of the action.
Eduk wrote:A shadow isn't an effect, it's the lack of an effect. If I stop shinning a light on something it doesn't have the effect of getting less light.
You miss the analogy.
  • The shadow is a 'result' of its object, not the 'cause' of the object.
    Consciousness is the 'result' of its object, not the 'cause' of the object.

    A shadow cannot exist without an object to be the shadow of.
    Consciousness cannot exist without an object to be conscious of.

    The shadow can never be the causer/creator of the object.
    Consciousness can never be the causer/creator of the object.
To state it overly-obviously simple: EVERYTHING that we are conscious of, ALREADY exists! -- it is therefore too late to EVER cause/create that which has already been caused/created.

We have been 'blinded' by indoctrination to see the 'obviousness' of this simple truth.

Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Eduk » December 5th, 2018, 1:00 pm

A shadow cannot exist without an object to be the shadow of.
Shadows don't physically exist. Holes don't physically exist. Independently of the mind many things do not exist, such as chairs.
it is therefore too late to EVER cause/create that which has already been caused/created.
Only if consciousness is a shadow. Which you haven't logically demonstrated.
We have been 'blinded' by indoctrination to see the 'obviousness' of this simple truth.
You should put this as your signature.
Unknown means unknown.

User avatar
RJG
Moderator
Posts: 1417
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by RJG » December 5th, 2018, 1:36 pm

Eduk - "You're killin' me Smalls!" :)

One question -- Can you be conscious of something, with nothing (no-something) to be conscious of?

Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Eduk » December 5th, 2018, 1:50 pm

One question -- Can you be conscious of something, with nothing (no-something) to be conscious of?
Right now I am conscious that I have zero apples.
Unknown means unknown.

User avatar
RJG
Moderator
Posts: 1417
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by RJG » December 5th, 2018, 2:09 pm

That wasn't the question.

Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Eduk » December 5th, 2018, 2:27 pm

That wasn't the question.
Then I didn't understand the question, apologies. Could you perhaps elaborate or rephrase?

I mean right now I'm not conscious of whether you have any apples or not. I don't have that data. Is that what you meant?

By the way I am not saying that consciousness does not physically exist. I am saying that shadows don't physically exist. You are the one claiming consciousness is a shadow which is a caused uncauser. I was saying I know of nothing caused which is not an effect.
Unknown means unknown.

Tamminen
Posts: 1147
Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Tamminen » December 5th, 2018, 5:46 pm

The subject is conscious of something. This is the basic structure of existence. The subject needs the being of this 'something' to be conscious of it, to exist. This 'something' is the universe. The subject has a material, bodily relationship with the universe. This relationship is the meaning of the universe. The universe in itself has no meaning, and its being is not possible without its relationship with the subject.

So the subject always has a body, but is itself something much more fundamental.

User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3037
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: How does one find True Knowledge?

Post by Burning ghost » December 5th, 2018, 8:39 pm

Eduk wrote:
December 5th, 2018, 12:11 pm
apologies @Burning ghost I don't think my point was clear. You said
It is probably best to view “remembering” as a means to navigate the world more effectively.
Now to my shovel analogy. If I said a shovel is
1. a tool for digging, lifting, and moving bulk materials, such as soil, coal, gravel, snow, sand, or ore.
That is true. But I can also go on and say most shovels
2. are hand tools consisting of a broad blade fixed to a medium-length handle.

I am trying to say that your description is akin to point 1 but not akin to point 2. I want to know what memory is, not what it is for (well both would be good).
What something is for is what it is. (1) and (2) are identical just like “small” is to “little.”

A small short “table” that you sit on is not called “a table,” it’s called “a chair.” A banana can be used as a hammer (and may do the job if used to hammer a drawing-pin into a cork board).

Memory is a multifaceted item. We understand it as having different parts to it (explicit and implicit). Such as when we walk we don’t “think” (remember) about walking anything like when we try to recall the answer to a history question. Some memories are very much like a “deck of cards” acting like a set of concatenated procedures - and we can tap into these “procedures” and alter them to some degree. This would then give us one view of memory as “learning.”

A knife is for knife things, a table for table things. And again, this doesn’t mean any item is limited to one thing or another only that our “habit” (which exists due to memory) is to use an item within a set sphere of usage or we wouldn’t be able between a chair or a banana; eating one and sitting on the other delineate these things.

If you then go on to think of a “human” you may then fool yourself into thinking that your perspective of other humans is the same as your own being. Humans are an extended external item not what you are. You are that which attends to differences and similarities and meaningfully navigates the world. Why? That of course is where the item of “Why?” begins to make some sense as it is a natural progression of our extending the question in order to prepare for the unknown.

Then there is this item we’re using now to communicate (language). It has different forms and does different things. It is not used when I go jogging, have a shower, listen to music, or draw a picture (or rather, it is not needed to do these activities yet useful to describe and direct them.). Language is an extension of memory too hence our ability to squiggle symbols and have someone else delve briefly into our general thoughts. I am simply suggesting that attending to the means of expressing and communicating these thoughts (verbal or not) is probably a wise path to tread because it can easily obscure the questions and create illusionary questions simply by sounding meaningful (think about the poem “Jabberwocky”).
AKA badgerjelly

Post Reply