Ontology of Being

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Steve3007 »

It's also a joke about how reductionist physics is, with the result that it can say precise things about physical systems, but lots of simplifying assumptions have to be made about those systems. The "assume a spherical horse in a vacuum" thing is poking fun at those simplifying assumptions. Higher level subjects can make statements about more complex physical systems (i.e. systems about which fewer simplifying assumptions are made) but their laws/rules/theories tend to be more heuristic. My step-daughter, for example, is currently studying sociology and moaning about how she has to learn a load of sociology theories created by old dead men (she's a bit of a feminist). Being sociology theories, they tend to be about extremely complex systems! The most complex in the known universe.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Steve3007 »

Chasw wrote:a) the physical universe, b) life forms, c) mental activity in the minds of higher order animals and d) beings and actions in an unseen spirit realm.
chewybrian wrote:A, B and C seem to stack to me. It's like having a boat and adding a mast and a sail to make a sailboat. D is...well, who knows, but you could reasonably just drop D if you want to narrow the choices.
So would you say that life forms aren't composed of physical matter?

And, regarding C, what counts as "higher order"? My understanding is that we're proposing that each of these 4 categories represents a mutually exclusive type of entity, in a way that is ontologically, objectively real, as opposed to just a way that we're thinking about it and dividing it up. But that would mean the difference between "higher order" and "lower order" animals is some kind of ontologically real hard dividing line. I can't see how that could possibly be true.
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by chewybrian »

Steve3007 wrote: October 15th, 2021, 6:08 am
Chasw wrote:a) the physical universe, b) life forms, c) mental activity in the minds of higher order animals and d) beings and actions in an unseen spirit realm.
chewybrian wrote:A, B and C seem to stack to me. It's like having a boat and adding a mast and a sail to make a sailboat. D is...well, who knows, but you could reasonably just drop D if you want to narrow the choices.
So would you say that life forms aren't composed of physical matter?

And, regarding C, what counts as "higher order"? My understanding is that we're proposing that each of these 4 categories represents a mutually exclusive type of entity, in a way that is ontologically, objectively real, as opposed to just a way that we're thinking about it and dividing it up. But that would mean the difference between "higher order" and "lower order" animals is some kind of ontologically real hard dividing line. I can't see how that could possibly be true.
I would say they stack, like I said before. You have a boat. It isn't a sailboat unless or until you add a sail. You have a human body. It isn't a person unless there is consciousness or the possibility of reawakening it. I am composed of physical matter but something else important has been added which makes me quite different from a dead body. We can't track and identify this other thing in the way we can all physical things. It doesn't have a mass, a speed, a location, smell, etc. It has correlation with things that do, but the experiencer that is me can not be quantified and tracked. It doesn't walk like a duck, it doesn't quack like a duck, so...

I know it is very unfashionable to be a dualist, but I can't pretend I don't think this way. I can't assume that *I* must be physical or material just because other things are. I don't see that I am fully bound by cause and effect, even though I see that these other things are. I can't explain why, which only reinforces in my mind that I am on the right track. If I was material, I could explain why without making bold assumptions that don't match my experience. It's one thing to assume what is in a black hole a gabillion miles away. It's quite another to assume what is right in front of me at every waking moment and to say that I need to accept unproven assumptions about myself that contradict my own perception.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Steve3007 »

chewybrian wrote:I would say they stack, like I said before. You have a boat. It isn't a sailboat unless or until you add a sail. You have a human body. It isn't a person unless there is consciousness or the possibility of reawakening it.
OK. When you previously said "they stack" I wasn't entirely sure what you meant by it. I thought it might have been a figure of speech like "that stacks up for me" meaning "that makes sense to me". So, yes, I would also say that they stack, in the sense that one sits (conceptually/metaphorically) on top of the other. But I think I'd use the stacking metaphor slightly differently to you.
I am composed of physical matter but something else important has been added which makes me quite different from a dead body. We can't track and identify this other thing in the way we can all physical things. It doesn't have a mass, a speed, a location, smell, etc. It has correlation with things that do, but the experiencer that is me can not be quantified and tracked. It doesn't walk like a duck, it doesn't quack like a duck, so...
Yes, I agree that there is something else important which doesn't have mass, a speed, smell, etc. (But it does have location. I don't believe it's located anywhere other than in my physical body.) Where we seem to disagree is in thinking that the something else is something other than relations between bits of matter. A standard analogy is with computer software. Software doesn't have a mass, a speed, smell, etc. We can, in a very real sense, regard it as a kind of "thing". But I don't think anyone would take that to mean that we need to have a dualist attitude towards computers and think of them as composed of two separate types of stuff - hardware and software. I think everyone understands that software exists physically as the relationships between bits of matter.
I know it is very unfashionable to be a dualist, but I can't pretend I don't think this way. I can't assume that *I* must be physical or material just because other things are. I don't see that I am fully bound by cause and effect, even though I see that these other things are. I can't explain why, which only reinforces in my mind that I am on the right track. If I was material, I could explain why without making bold assumptions that don't match my experience. It's one thing to assume what is in a black hole a gabillion miles away. It's quite another to assume what is right in front of me at every waking moment and to say that I need to accept unproven assumptions about myself that contradict my own perception.
I know that's what you think because you've said it before in other topics.

One thing I would add to this for now: Not being a dualist like that (being a materialist for example) doesn't mean that you have to conclude that you're "fully bound by cause and effect" in a way that implies you're an automaton or a computer.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Steve3007 wrote: October 15th, 2021, 5:31 am It's also a joke about how reductionist physics is, with the result that it can say precise things about physical systems, but lots of simplifying assumptions have to be made about those systems. The "assume a spherical horse in a vacuum" thing is poking fun at those simplifying assumptions.
I was just about to comment on the part of the point you missed, but here 👆 it is. 👍🙂
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by chewybrian »

Steve3007 wrote: October 15th, 2021, 7:59 am Not being a dualist like that (being a materialist for example) doesn't mean that you have to conclude that you're "fully bound by cause and effect" in a way that implies you're an automaton or a computer.
I don't see how it could be otherwise, unless I attribute decision making capacities to raindrops or sewing machines. If all material things are bound by cause and effect, and I am material, then what else could I think? I can admit that I am material and give up thinking that I could affect outcomes in the world by making *real* choices, or I could accept my will for what it appears to be and conclude that I must be something else. Obviously I choose the latter. I've never even seen in theory how compatibilism is supposed to work. Every attempt at explaining it seems hollow and silly to me, and ignores the elephant(s) in the room.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by chewybrian »

p.s. We know the locations of brain activities that correlate with certain types of thoughts or feelings, but we don't have a hard location for the experience itself.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Steve3007 »

chewybrian wrote:I don't see how it could be otherwise, unless I attribute decision making capacities to raindrops or sewing machines. If all material things are bound by cause and effect, and I am material, then what else could I think?...
But materialism, as an ontological position (a position as to what things really exist, and what is the case about the real world) doesn't necessarily go with the opinion that all material things are bound by cause and effect. My view on causality (as I said in a topic I started a few days ago) is that it is a general principle that we propose based on our observations of specific instances. i.e. a principle arrived at via inductive reasoning. That would mean that "bound by" would be the wrong term to use. It would be a descriptive principle, not the prescriptive one that "bound by" implies.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Steve3007 »

chewybrian wrote:p.s. We know the locations of brain activities that correlate with certain types of thoughts or feelings, but we don't have a hard location for the experience itself.
It depends on what you mean by "hard". It depends on the length of the error bars. I know, as well as I know anything, that everything associated with my personality happens in the middle of my head, plus or minus, let's say, 8 inches.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Steve3007 wrote: October 15th, 2021, 7:59 am Not being a dualist like that (being a materialist for example) doesn't mean that you have to conclude that you're "fully bound by cause and effect" in a way that implies you're an automaton or a computer.
chewybrian wrote: October 15th, 2021, 10:19 am I don't see how it could be otherwise, unless I attribute decision making capacities to raindrops or sewing machines. If all material things are bound by cause and effect, and I am material, then what else could I think? I can admit that I am material and give up thinking that I could affect outcomes in the world by making *real* choices, or I could accept my will for what it appears to be and conclude that I must be something else. Obviously I choose the latter. I've never even seen in theory how compatibilism is supposed to work. Every attempt at explaining it seems hollow and silly to me, and ignores the elephant(s) in the room.
I think the real dualism here is that you - like the rest of us! 😉 - are an intelligent individual that thinks and acts. But you also co-operate and collaborate with the universe of which you are an indivisible part. In that sense, perhaps your 'will' is a lesser thing? Each of us is an actively-contributing part of the whole. 'Will' is simply a perspective on this, I think.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Chasw
Posts: 153
Joined: September 1st, 2012, 9:13 am
Favorite Philosopher: GWF Hegel
Location: Seattle, USA
Contact:

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Chasw »

chewybrian wrote: October 15th, 2021, 10:21 am p.s. We know the locations of brain activities that correlate with certain types of thoughts or feelings, but we don't have a hard location for the experience itself.
Good point, chewy. I'm of the opinion neuroscientists will soon be able to correlate electromagnetic emissions from the brain with an person's raw feels, e.g., anger, arousal, fear, etc., followed by even finer details such as deception, suspicion, etc. However, the details of our streams of consciousness, our decision making, conscience, etc. will remain hidden from direct observation for many years to come. I won't say never, but the challenge of reading our minds is so difficult, there is no clear path for decipherment of external phenomena. Among higher order animals, I believe humans are the only genus that can deliberate and decide what to think about next. e.g., counting sheep to promote sleep. - CW
The central question of human existence is not why we are here, but rather why we behave the way we do - http://onhumanaffairs.blogspot.com/
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Belindi »

chewybrian wrote: October 15th, 2021, 10:19 am
Steve3007 wrote: October 15th, 2021, 7:59 am Not being a dualist like that (being a materialist for example) doesn't mean that you have to conclude that you're "fully bound by cause and effect" in a way that implies you're an automaton or a computer.
I don't see how it could be otherwise, unless I attribute decision making capacities to raindrops or sewing machines. If all material things are bound by cause and effect, and I am material, then what else could I think? I can admit that I am material and give up thinking that I could affect outcomes in the world by making *real* choices, or I could accept my will for what it appears to be and conclude that I must be something else. Obviously I choose the latter. I've never even seen in theory how compatibilism is supposed to work. Every attempt at explaining it seems hollow and silly to me, and ignores the elephant(s) in the room.
I agree about compatibilism!

As to raindrops and sewing machines, these have fewer possibilities than you, a human being.You are more free than raindrops and sewing machines because you have choices and know you have choices and know what your options are. Like raindrops and sewing machines you are not absolutely free but you are relatively free. You are literate, and that fact confers an extra freedom of choice for you that illiterate men and sewing machines lack. You have insight into your own emotional reactions and that fact too confers a freedom that some men lack.
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by AverageBozo »

The existence of being. This sounds like a reach to me. While it’s true that we may experience classifications of beings differently, we experience everything in the real world through the same five senses. Why is it necessary even to have so many classes of ontology?
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Steve3007 »

The existence of being. This sounds like a reach to me.
Since ontology is about what exists, the title "Ontology of Being" really just means "Ontology of what ontology studies". It should probably have just been titled "My Ontology".
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Ontology of Being

Post by Steve3007 »

Why is it necessary even to have so many classes of ontology?
Good question. I'm curious to know the answer too.
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

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