The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

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.
Tosen
Posts: 25
Joined: March 25th, 2018, 12:06 pm

The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Tosen »

We philosophers, or more precisely, we human beings have dismissed or taken for granted that which has been in front of us all of our lives, and which we are using at this precise moment; ideas. I don't think there is a philosophy that ventures to explore and analyze ideas themselves. I would say phenomenology was the closest in doing this, but it needed more.

Have you people ever stopped in your daily lives and literally "look" at the content of your thoughts? Like for example, listening to a highly descriptive story from a friend and diving into your own mind imagining it? I mean we do this all the time, but a deep analysis would be to literally "look" at the mental world that you have created in your mind. For example: How do the people look like? The objects? The setting? If you imagined things with color then what colors this you "see"? Or how did the imagery change or transform as your friend was giving you more details of the story? What was the final product of what you imagined, and the course of that imagination-process? This is much deeper than one would think.

Personally, sometimes I would speculate on what the contents of my friends mind "look" like. As in, what does he "sees" that enables him to understand things the way he does. Why do philosophers take this for granted, I have never seen a philosopher ask another: "What can you see in your mind that I cannot see, can you tell me how it looks like? Up until now, I have implicitly defined thinking as only composed of imagery, or images you see in your mind (Like imagining a situation, remembering something, etc). But how, in the case of rational thinking, how does logic function in the mind? Many of you have taken for granted how some people just cannot grasp basic principles of logic or argumentation. So, what is inside their minds that makes then incapable of understanding or seeing the subtle mechanisms of logic or rational thinking in general?

In fact, let me elevate in one step, what is inside our minds that let's us understand things that other minds cannot? Even though we look at the same reality? It's like, for example, deciphering the horrendously difficult work of Jacques Derrida or the work of Martin Heidegger, or of the Greek methaphysician Parmenides?

In this sense, all our minds are separated with one another, in the way we literally interpret reality. There are things we see that others cannot, and things that other see that we don't see. Hence one of the possible reasons why on these forums some philosophers don't even understand others at all(Or human beings in general). So the fundamental question is, what is understanding something and how can someone reach it? How do we get to those "Aha!" moments were we suddenly understand something we couldn't before?

Thinking about thinking can be confusing. Because an error would be to speculate on how our mind thinks things with an improper approach. My proposal is to look at the content of our minds directly, the same way we perceive and look at the external world. In this case, it would be our internal world. See the obvious difference between a physical object and a mental object or an idea. So, we would look first onto the process of thinking or of ideas themselves and then through that observation, try and extract some fundamental principles to work with. The former would be an empirical "looking-in" into one's own mind and the latter would be the speculation or the rationalization of the observed phenomena. Notice that it's the same as how scientists observe and theorize about the external world. They look at realty, observe and later rationalize. In this case, it would be our own world of ideas. So in philosophical terms, it would be a combination of phenomenology (Observing first person conscious experiences: thoughts, feelings, and so on) and epistemology (To analyze the process of understanding or sense-making).

There are many and many more implications to this in my mind, but i'll leave this as an introduction to the topic.
MAYA EL
Posts: 177
Joined: May 2nd, 2019, 11:17 pm

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by MAYA EL »

Yes I do this quite often. People would be surprised how much they will come to understand just by doing this
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Hereandnow »

Tosen
In this sense, all our minds are separated with one another, in the way we literally interpret reality. There are things we see that others cannot, and things that other see that we don't see. Hence one of the possible reasons why on these forums some philosophers don't even understand others at all(Or human beings in general). So the fundamental question is, what is understanding something and how can someone reach it? How do we get to those "Aha!" moments were we suddenly understand something we couldn't before?

Thinking about thinking can be confusing. Because an error would be to speculate on how our mind thinks things with an improper approach. My proposal is to look at the content of our minds directly, the same way we perceive and look at the external world. In this case, it would be our internal world. See the obvious difference between a physical object and a mental object or an idea. So, we would look first onto the process of thinking or of ideas themselves and then through that observation, try and extract some fundamental principles to work with. The former would be an empirical "looking-in" into one's own mind and the latter would be the speculation or the rationalization of the observed phenomena. Notice that it's the same as how scientists observe and theorize about the external world. They look at realty, observe and later rationalize. In this case, it would be our own world of ideas. So in philosophical terms, it would be a combination of phenomenology (Observing first person conscious experiences: thoughts, feelings, and so on) and epistemology (To analyze the process of understanding or sense-making).
An interesting collection of ideas. You sound like you've read Heidegger and others and found them wanting. Odd that the questions you ask are precisely what Husserl and Heidegger put forth and address. Looking "at the mind directly, others seeing what we don't see, and the thinking dasein that contemplates itself: all of these are great themes of existentialism and I think the best way to address these is to investigate Heidegger and the rest. Have you read Kierkegaard? It doesn't matter. My question to you is who have you read and how does s/he come up short? How is it that Heidegger's Being and Time fails to look exactly where you want to look?

Here is an issue in hermeneutics: encountering the world in always an interpretative event, even when it comes to acknowledging this lamp on my desk. If language is inherently interpretative, then how is it that we can ever apprehend actuality at all? What is it that we DO apprehend? To observe a thought, the thinking of a thought is an interpretation as well, is a taking the thought as some interpretative assignment (as in "as" a lamp). So, from whence comes the Real if interpretation rules thoughts about thoughts?

Right up your alley, I think.
User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1243
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by h_k_s »

Tosen wrote: October 5th, 2019, 3:10 pm We philosophers, or more precisely, we human beings have dismissed or taken for granted that which has been in front of us all of our lives, and which we are using at this precise moment; ideas. I don't think there is a philosophy that ventures to explore and analyze ideas themselves. I would say phenomenology was the closest in doing this, but it needed more.

Have you people ever stopped in your daily lives and literally "look" at the content of your thoughts? Like for example, listening to a highly descriptive story from a friend and diving into your own mind imagining it? I mean we do this all the time, but a deep analysis would be to literally "look" at the mental world that you have created in your mind. For example: How do the people look like? The objects? The setting? If you imagined things with color then what colors this you "see"? Or how did the imagery change or transform as your friend was giving you more details of the story? What was the final product of what you imagined, and the course of that imagination-process? This is much deeper than one would think.

Personally, sometimes I would speculate on what the contents of my friends mind "look" like. As in, what does he "sees" that enables him to understand things the way he does. Why do philosophers take this for granted, I have never seen a philosopher ask another: "What can you see in your mind that I cannot see, can you tell me how it looks like? Up until now, I have implicitly defined thinking as only composed of imagery, or images you see in your mind (Like imagining a situation, remembering something, etc). But how, in the case of rational thinking, how does logic function in the mind? Many of you have taken for granted how some people just cannot grasp basic principles of logic or argumentation. So, what is inside their minds that makes then incapable of understanding or seeing the subtle mechanisms of logic or rational thinking in general?

In fact, let me elevate in one step, what is inside our minds that let's us understand things that other minds cannot? Even though we look at the same reality? It's like, for example, deciphering the horrendously difficult work of Jacques Derrida or the work of Martin Heidegger, or of the Greek methaphysician Parmenides?

In this sense, all our minds are separated with one another, in the way we literally interpret reality. There are things we see that others cannot, and things that other see that we don't see. Hence one of the possible reasons why on these forums some philosophers don't even understand others at all(Or human beings in general). So the fundamental question is, what is understanding something and how can someone reach it? How do we get to those "Aha!" moments were we suddenly understand something we couldn't before?

Thinking about thinking can be confusing. Because an error would be to speculate on how our mind thinks things with an improper approach. My proposal is to look at the content of our minds directly, the same way we perceive and look at the external world. In this case, it would be our internal world. See the obvious difference between a physical object and a mental object or an idea. So, we would look first onto the process of thinking or of ideas themselves and then through that observation, try and extract some fundamental principles to work with. The former would be an empirical "looking-in" into one's own mind and the latter would be the speculation or the rationalization of the observed phenomena. Notice that it's the same as how scientists observe and theorize about the external world. They look at realty, observe and later rationalize. In this case, it would be our own world of ideas. So in philosophical terms, it would be a combination of phenomenology (Observing first person conscious experiences: thoughts, feelings, and so on) and epistemology (To analyze the process of understanding or sense-making).

There are many and many more implications to this in my mind, but i'll leave this as an introduction to the topic.
Speak for yourself, Tosen .

That's always the safest.
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Felix »

There's a saying in yoga: "nothing true can be thought." One must transcend thought to know reality.
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Hereandnow »

One has to define thought" in that statement. Not that I disagree, but it needs pinning down. After all, remove thought altogether and the very notion of agency is lost as well.
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Felix »

Thinking or cogitation... thought is contingent and limited in scope and therefore can only give one relative knowledge about existence. Relative knowledge is by definition incomplete and thus its conclusions are never completely reliable or true.
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Sy Borg »

Thought are self-generating, flowing like a river. The ideas in that assembly line that we focus on and what we are officially thinking about.

Thoughts, like other physical things, are always collapsing down possibilities, and that process opens up new ones, eg. once X has occurred, now Y is impossible but A can now occur.
User avatar
Mark1955
Posts: 739
Joined: July 21st, 2015, 4:02 am
Favorite Philosopher: David Hume
Location: Nottingham, England.

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Mark1955 »

Felix wrote: October 8th, 2019, 11:34 pm There's a saying in yoga: "nothing true can be thought." One must transcend thought to know reality.
And what is "transcending thought", relying on the subconscious perhaps.
If you think you know the answer you probably don't understand the question.
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Hereandnow »

Greta
Thought are self-generating, flowing like a river. The ideas in that assembly line that we focus on and what we are officially thinking about.

Thoughts, like other physical things, are always collapsing down possibilities, and that process opens up new ones, eg. once X has occurred, now Y is impossible but A can now occur.
Interesting how you summed up a critical issue in modern philosophy, which is "presence" vis a vis "flowing like a river" conscious thought. How does the presence of things step forward in the midst of a forward looking river of thought that constitutes awareness itself? All perception bears the stamp of the thinking "I". To "see" at all is to project thoughts, and thought flows...like a river.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Mark1955 wrote: October 10th, 2019, 6:54 am And what is "transcending thought", relying on the subconscious perhaps.
Yes, perhaps. And perhaps it refers to those things that can be taught and learned, but only by experience, not by thinking about it? I'm sure there are other possibilities too. 🤔
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Hereandnow »

Felix
Thinking or cogitation... thought is contingent and limited in scope and therefore can only give one relative knowledge about existence. Relative knowledge is by definition incomplete and thus its conclusions are never completely reliable or true.
.

Facts are contingent, but thought? Modus Ponens? But to the point, how about the thought "I am" that attends every occasion of awareness? How about the the underlying formal structure of the conditional that implicitly attend getting out of bed, as in, if the foot encounters the floor, it will sustain the body's weight? We don't SAY these, but the logical form of just being there at all is implicitly thoughtful, rational. The existential counterpart of thought, it should be quickly added, is NOT itself thought. This is controversial, though.
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Felix »

Mark1955 wrote: And what is "transcending thought", relying on the subconscious perhaps.
Well, in yogic or zen philosophy, it is attaining/relying on the superconscious, but one must first access it.
Hereandnow: But to the point, how about the thought "I am" that attends every occasion of awareness?"
But what does the thinker identify as "I" or self? His personality, historical self, or other contingent personal features? Or has he recognized the being behind his ego? Does he believe he is merely a thinking animal?
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1243
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by h_k_s »

I think, therefore I exist.

I do not doubt that I think; I am not a Skeptic.

I do not doubt that I exist; same reason.

I am a Romantic Empiricist; I trust my perceptions of seeing, hearing, smelling, touching, and tasting, as well as my thinking on these perceptions.

Skeptics have it really rough -- they don't know which end is up.

Rene Descartes banished skepticism once and forever. Pity so many skeptics keep creeping up in its wake.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: The experience of thinking; looking at ideas themselves

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Felix wrote: October 10th, 2019, 5:33 pm
Mark1955 wrote: And what is "transcending thought", relying on the subconscious perhaps.
Well, in yogic or zen philosophy, it is attaining/relying on the superconscious, but one must first access it.

The "superconscious"? What's that, then? 🤔
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