Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 18th, 2020, 7:26 amYes.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑October 17th, 2020, 7:58 pm
The question is what you think you're sensing. Your own mind? Or something else.
lol:
"Will you have the steak? Or the fish?"
"Yes."
Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 18th, 2020, 7:26 amYes.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑October 17th, 2020, 7:58 pm
The question is what you think you're sensing. Your own mind? Or something else.
Well, I believe the world exists. It was already here when I arrived and I expect it to still be here after I'm gone. Solipsism and brain-in-a-vat may or may not be true, but they would make no practical difference if they were. So, the presumption of an objective, empirical reality is quite safe.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑October 18th, 2020, 8:50 am
lol:
"Will you have the steak? Or the fish?"
"Yes."
But do you see "The world was already here when I arrived and I expect it to still be here after I'm gone" as something you just take on faith more or less?Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 18th, 2020, 5:36 pmWell, I believe the world exists. It was already here when I arrived and I expect it to still be here after I'm gone. Solipsism and brain-in-a-vat may or may not be true, but they would make no practical difference if they were. So, the presumption of an objective, empirical reality is quite safe.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑October 18th, 2020, 8:50 am
lol:
"Will you have the steak? Or the fish?"
"Yes."
No, it's not just on faith. There is plenty of empirical evidence, such as the science of the origins of the universe and the origins of life, and the origins of different species, including us. We observe people being born and other people dying. We observe the Earth still here.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 8:39 amBut do you see "The world was already here when I arrived and I expect it to still be here after I'm gone" as something you just take on faith more or less?Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 18th, 2020, 5:36 pm
Well, I believe the world exists. It was already here when I arrived and I expect it to still be here after I'm gone. Solipsism and brain-in-a-vat may or may not be true, but they would make no practical difference if they were. So, the presumption of an objective, empirical reality is quite safe.
But there is a much deeper level of faith at work. Can you really say that you have seen at first hand, and understood all the significance of the evidence that tells us the world is as old as it is.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 12:13 pmNo, it's not just on faith. There is plenty of empirical evidence, such as the science of the origins of the universe and the origins of life, and the origins of different species, including us. We observe people being born and other people dying. We observe the Earth still here.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 8:39 am
But do you see "The world was already here when I arrived and I expect it to still be here after I'm gone" as something you just take on faith more or less?
I remember reading a little of the debate between Thomas Huxley and some Catholic guy. Aldous Huxley's wife wrote "You are Not the Target", a self-help guide, and Aldous wrote "Brave New World".Sculptor1 wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 3:52 pmBut there is a much deeper level of faith at work. Can you really say that you have seen at first hand, and understood all the significance of the evidence that tells us the world is as old as it is.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 12:13 pm
No, it's not just on faith. There is plenty of empirical evidence, such as the science of the origins of the universe and the origins of life, and the origins of different species, including us. We observe people being born and other people dying. We observe the Earth still here.
Speaking for myslef I've read Origin of Species from cover to cover twice, Ascent of Man, as well as many monographs and correspondence of Darwin, Huxley and Galton. I've studied biology, and archaeology. I even had a fossil collection, but I've not seen all the evidence of earth's antiquity at first hand so I have to trust the scholarship and that is a kind of faith with a small 'f'.
If you think the rest of the universe has nothing to offer your idea of reality then so be it. But what you seem content with is an extremely naive anthropocentric bubble.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 5:51 pmI remember reading a little of the debate between Thomas Huxley and some Catholic guy. Aldous Huxley's wife wrote "You are Not the Target", a self-help guide, and Aldous wrote "Brave New World".Sculptor1 wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 3:52 pm
But there is a much deeper level of faith at work. Can you really say that you have seen at first hand, and understood all the significance of the evidence that tells us the world is as old as it is.
Speaking for myslef I've read Origin of Species from cover to cover twice, Ascent of Man, as well as many monographs and correspondence of Darwin, Huxley and Galton. I've studied biology, and archaeology. I even had a fossil collection, but I've not seen all the evidence of earth's antiquity at first hand so I have to trust the scholarship and that is a kind of faith with a small 'f'.
But I didn't need all that to figure out what reality looks like. All you gotta do is bump into something. Not very deep at all.
Not sure why you think the Huxley family is relevant here. You forgot Julien BTW.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 5:51 pmI remember reading a little of the debate between Thomas Huxley and some Catholic guy. Aldous Huxley's wife wrote "You are Not the Target", a self-help guide, and Aldous wrote "Brave New World".Sculptor1 wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 3:52 pm
But there is a much deeper level of faith at work. Can you really say that you have seen at first hand, and understood all the significance of the evidence that tells us the world is as old as it is.
Speaking for myslef I've read Origin of Species from cover to cover twice, Ascent of Man, as well as many monographs and correspondence of Darwin, Huxley and Galton. I've studied biology, and archaeology. I even had a fossil collection, but I've not seen all the evidence of earth's antiquity at first hand so I have to trust the scholarship and that is a kind of faith with a small 'f'.
But I didn't need all that to figure out what reality looks like. All you gotta do is bump into something. Not very deep at all.
Let me clarify something. Additional information that is meaningful and relevant is always desirable. But the notion of "deepness" is subjective, and open to challenges of "My ideas are deeper than yours" which cannot be proven because "deeper" is not a meaningful term in regard to facts. Facts have but one depth.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑October 20th, 2020, 1:50 pmIf you think the rest of the universe has nothing to offer your idea of reality then so be it. But what you seem content with is an extremely naive anthropocentric bubble.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 5:51 pm
I remember reading a little of the debate between Thomas Huxley and some Catholic guy. Aldous Huxley's wife wrote "You are Not the Target", a self-help guide, and Aldous wrote "Brave New World".
But I didn't need all that to figure out what reality looks like. All you gotta do is bump into something. Not very deep at all.
If people had taken your attitude through history then we'd still be living in caves on a flat world and the universe would stil be revolving around us.
Just sharing a little background on myself as you did when you listed your readings.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑October 20th, 2020, 1:52 pmNot sure why you think the Huxley family is relevant here. You forgot Julien BTW.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 19th, 2020, 5:51 pm
I remember reading a little of the debate between Thomas Huxley and some Catholic guy. Aldous Huxley's wife wrote "You are Not the Target", a self-help guide, and Aldous wrote "Brave New World".
But I didn't need all that to figure out what reality looks like. All you gotta do is bump into something. Not very deep at all.
I've no idea where you are going with this.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 20th, 2020, 3:18 pmLet me clarify something. Additional information that is meaningful and relevant is always desirable. But the notion of "deepness" is subjective, and open to challenges of "My ideas are deeper than yours" which cannot be proven because "deeper" is not a meaningful term in regard to facts. Facts have but one depth.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑October 20th, 2020, 1:50 pm
If you think the rest of the universe has nothing to offer your idea of reality then so be it. But what you seem content with is an extremely naive anthropocentric bubble.
If people had taken your attitude through history then we'd still be living in caves on a flat world and the universe would stil be revolving around us.
Okay so why relevant to this discussion?Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 20th, 2020, 3:20 pmJust sharing a little background on myself as you did when you listed your readings.
PS.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 20th, 2020, 3:18 pm cannot be proven because "deeper" is not a meaningful term in regard to facts. ...
Hmm. So, it is similar to the empirical evidence you have for making that statement.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑October 20th, 2020, 4:10 pmAnd the point is that you have basically ZERO actual empirical evidence for the vast majority of your knoweldge.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 20th, 2020, 3:18 pm cannot be proven because "deeper" is not a meaningful term in regard to facts. ...
It nothing at all to do with subjectivity.
I do not have to have any empirical knowledge to make that statement, but I know it is the truth, and you know that is true about me also.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑October 20th, 2020, 4:43 pmHmm. So, it is similar to the empirical evidence you have for making that statement.
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
by Chet Shupe
March 2023