Pantagruel

But as I pointed out in my comment about artificial dialectic, they can. You can encounter something which sets a new standard of beauty, whereupon wh...

If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, then the same thing can literally be beautiful to me and ugly to you.

RG Collingwood had an interesting notion about how we think in terms of "artificial" dialectics. So the most ugly thing you have ever seen becomes one...

Yes, these are precisely the sentiments of John Dewey. He believes that the true role and function of education is the perpetuation and gradual perfec...

The French Revolution, Thomas Carlyle

Democracy and Education by John Dewey. I'm shifting into a politics, democracy and legal theory mode for the next few books. edit: a few tidbits from ...

So is this related to the process described in the Bardo Thodol (Tibetan Book of the Dead)? Which also deals primarily with experiencing and/or transc...

I don't think so. To be great, you must first be good. A thing is good if it functions well, or performs its functions well. America is a society. So ...

Unfortunately the idea that one country can be great all on its own is now archaic (isolationism). So that wouldn't be a rational message. Then again,...

Even an entire society, a nation, or all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not the owners of the earth. They are simply its posses...

It stands to reason that, to accomplish anything collectively, we have to agree upon it. More precisely, the extent of our collective abilities will c...

Does that minimize or maximize the force of his discovery?

Hmm. Well, that may be, it wasn't exactly what I meant though. To be precise, the idea of the being of thought is my central motivation. Trust me, I'v...

With you to here. I don't take issue with the phantom-deity ideas, but for me it doesn't add to (or detract from) the idea that the being of thought i...

On this we agree 100% There's a man whose convictions come across with force in his writings.

I don't think anyone seriously believes they are a brain in a vat either. And yet...that is the whole point, isn't it? Reality can be...deceptive. And...

Well, it was a question. To me it is clear that "rationality" is a much larger concept than logic, and one which operates at both the individual and t...

So is the nature of reason predominantly inclusive, or exclusive?

I think the argument is that the ivory-tower intellectual is not actually being mindful because he or she is neglecting critical components of practic...

I do not get it.

Yes, of the object "human". Not of the object "rock" or "atom" or of objectivity per se.If subjectivity is a uniquely emergent property, then you can'...

Well, one final. Doubt is clearly a species of belief: I doubt x is true. I believe x is true. You do not require reasons for belief. As soon as you a...

Yes, when philosophers believe that they can abstract reason from it's practical applications, Ivory tower is applicable. I'm not sure what your zombi...

Descartes' reasons are explained through his arguments. Accusing Descartes of "faux doubt" means that you are not accepting the content of his argumen...

And upon what do you base the assertion that Descartes did not experience this as a real and living doubt? He said he did. So you just do not believe ...

Isn't the power of choice a wonderful thing? :up:

As I said, the same could be said of any belief of any person, including yours, unless you can demonstrate that you're committed to it in an existenti...

I really like this idea of setting up a pseudo-dialectic between a poor way of doing something and a better way of doing something. You're right, we h...

For me this is pretty straightforward. How can you be held responsible for something for which you are not responsible? Since we do attribute responsi...

Ok, that would be an idealist conception of reason as a critical faculty. However reason is also the capacity to communicate with other individuals wh...

Sorry, I don't understand the construct. The subject is an object. Yes, things which are subjects (have subjective experiences) are also objects. But ...

Very poetic notions and true...for some. Having had insomnia for several years I can attest that even sleep can be a burden.

I'm pretty sure I said being real for a subject is not the same thing as being real as an object. I'm quite sure I did not say a subject is an object.

I think population management is eminently sensible, given that overpopulation either causes or exacerbates the most serious problems facing humanity....

If Descartes' doubt is faux doubt, then equally anyone's commitment to any belief could be characterized as faux belief...unless it led to a serious c...

Specifically what about Descartes' proposition of radical metaphysical doubt qualifies it as being faux doubt?

Yes, they are two different things. Isn't that what I said?

lol! Yes, of course. I've been wanting to leverage neural net modelling capabilities since I started reading cybernetics in the 90s. Now it has become...

Yes, it would have to be an extrapolation. What I'd really like to do is attempt to integrate a lot more social dimensions, flesh out his class-confli...

I'm nearly done all 3 volumes - I'd love to see a full blown global economics simulator based on Marx's principles. Starting Structure of Social Actio...

Focusing on what you can change and changing it is not at all the same thing as accepting your fate. You are misconstruing and mischaracterizing stoic...

Indeed. So it would seem that being real for a subject is independent of being real as an object.

Aren't the concepts "real" and "Illusory" inherently exclusive? If something is an illusion, then it is by definition "not real". So saying reality is...

Maybe read some Bhagavad-gita? “The Blessed Lord said: No doubt, you are right, O mighty Arjuna, that the mind is hard to control, wavering and restle...

Sounds perfect. Parsons has made a few references to Piaget and I've been looking for something. On the list. Thank you! :grin:

:up:

Interested to hear what you think of this.

That's why I get up early in the morning.

Precisely. This problem isn't for any kind of a pragmatic epistemology. :up:

Linnaeus did not create the taxonomic structure, he only described it. And he could be wrong. Alternate taxonomies may also apply.