Got it. Well, I think his idea of "immediate intuitions" are "unmediated" awareness of sensory input, it's not necessarily an accurate picture of the ...
You can perceive, yet have a wrong notion of what is there. A simple mirage tells us that. Why should we have more direct access than is evolutionaril...
:ok: Do we not, by our very thinking nature have "immediate" background structures of his categories? The things that structure the very world (cognit...
And thus, I would say, not quite a direct realist. Perhaps he did think we had immediate access to the categories but I would say that is still a medi...
What are you a freakn Hobbit in the Shire? "Oh that Kant-speak is for them 'queer folk' that ain't from around these parts". What an odd prejudice for...
Yet he posited that time/space/causality and the categories were in the "mind". So he doesn't deny the objects, just that we have access to what they ...
Even Kant supposed a thing in itself. Something may be there. An apple on a table- how do you suppose the apple interacts with the table? Certainly yo...
That is a straw man. There may be a tree, but is it the veridical access to the tree? Rather, the human mind constructs a tree otherwise what is cogni...
Yes indeed, it seems space-time is what saves realism for the events to obtain (or does it?). What does it mean to be a localized event or interaction...
To be fair, I’m trying to play by the dichotomy setup by the OP. If he’s talking about a crude direct realism, whereby we have unfettered access to th...
Before I get to my view, I'd like to defend indirect realism, at least as it opposes direct realism. I think Dennett does have good evidence when disc...
No one is saying it doesn't on the indirect realism side. Direct vs. indirect realism becomes about whatever the caller wants apparently. Direct reali...
I literally wrote about this several times before regarding the hard problem. https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/102760 https://thephil...
So you bring up the Cartesian Theater problem, something I've discussed often. This is simply Hard Problem stuff. Have we moved to this topic? Before ...
Yep, and that was what I was getting at.. one of the colloquial terms, aye. Don't play word games. For once Witty may be right when it comes to this k...
Correct, according to the current scientific account- the perceiver is the culmination of various brain and body processes. This collection when discu...
How is that related conclusion occurring by adding more biological components (or any at all)? You are simply restating a claim and then not refuting ...
Can you elaborate on this, defining instantiation here, and property and why one instantiation of property is not property? I may agree, but just want...
Yep, sure are. And by me adding this to the equation, what exactly would that be adding to the problem? We already have X brain and sensory components...
:up: Yeah this sounds like a good synthesis of the landscape. I think the bigger picture is not the epistemology but the metaphysics. What are "physic...
Good But, is this direct or indirect realism really? Direct realism I would say is about knowledge of the world, not mechanism of the knowledge. The m...
Yes indeed, much different conception from Mr. Schop and one I like to delve into but so far in this discussion keeping it mild by just starting with ...
You are playing around with definitions. A naive realist would say that what the person is perceiving is "really" the tree as it is, without any inter...
You are a human. Humans are comprised of various sensory organs that are wired to a central processing called the brain. This brain processes the data...
It seems like you are simply getting at the hard problem of consciousness, which is probably where @"bert1" is coming at it, if I remember, as he (if ...
Again, I think an empirical question. We know for example, that the brain has various ways of integrating information from sensory information. Humans...
Ok, I thought I was crazy. I looked back at the previous conversations, and it seems like he is asking a basically empirical question: "How is it that...
Right, so what is @"NOS4A2" getting at? Can you see how I am confused as to what he is saying? He doesn't like terms like "actually out there". He onl...
That is why I have to bring in metaphysics, I am sorry. Humans bring an interpretive point of view. Do you believe there was a time without humans, or...
Yes, this another way of saying what I am asking, which is why I'm perplexed at your objection. The naive/direct realist believes the perceiver is per...
I'm not introducing the "thing itself" in the "noumena" way. Rather, I am using it in the sense that we are perceiving the tree exactly as it is in re...
Who is arguing against this? So a tree exists, and we are seeing a tree. But that is not really the direct realism argument. Rather, it is positing wh...
Well, that's why you need to understand that question. Direct realism seems to me, to posit that we "objectively" see the thing "as it is in itself". ...
It's philosophy, and inherently messy subjects, so I say go for it. If you want to remain silent on any speculative thing, than do so, but I see us mi...
Sure, fair enough. But the question being asked here requires metaphysical positing, maybe not commitments, so that is what I am doing. Obviously, if ...
Again, these are all category errors in the context I described: You are doing what I was saying we tend to do- inserting ourselves in the picture. Yo...
I think these debates ultimately come down to "what" physical properties are without an observer. What does it mean that charge, mass, energy is "obje...
From at least two perspectives, this is not a good moral justification. One reason it’s not is that not being born means no person experienced the col...
Totally missing the point of most antinatalists' stance against creating suffering for future generations. Also, a lot of ANs aren't even consequentia...
We can regard our life as a uselessly disturbing episode in the blissful repose of nothingness. -Schopenhauer This is true. Aggressive paternalism ass...
Comments