Janus

What exactly do you take the claims of metaphysical naturalism to be?

Then I don't know what you are proposing. Culture cannot explain a shared world. If we want to try to think of explanations for a shared world, then w...

So your "collective mind" includes the animals as well? I'm not saying there are objects independent of human experience and understanding, I am sayin...

"In a field where intriguing, almost mysterious phenomena like “quantum superposition” prevail—a situation where one particle can be in two or even “a...

Culture can determine the forms in which we understand things, but it cannot account for the everyday fact that we don't only see things in the same g...

:lol: Appropriate clip! :up: If I have a tendency any way it would be that way...I certainly don't believe in or prepare for an after life.

By all means roll your eyes if that's all you can come up with...

I agree that the truth (which I would say means reality) of materialism and idealism are non-determinable. So I see them as purely speculative, and ul...

I wasn't insulting you; I was saying your example is a stupid one. The idea that there is a universal consciousness as opposed to the idea that there ...

I would say the salient polemic is materiality vs ideality. If idealism were true it would be the reality.

Now you're just being stupid.

I don't think being members of a species, language group and culture is sufficient to explain the fact that we all see the same things in the same pla...

You're persisting in straw-manning idealism. There might be one version which says that there are individual minds and their perceptions. with no conn...

I agree with you about the honest and dishonest interlocutors. As to the dishonest: either deliberately or deludedly (monomaniacally) so. :up: I think...

How about critical thinkers, dogmatists, skeptics, system builders, experientialists, practitioners (as in philosophy as a way of life). Any of those ...

A good list that I'd modify/ augment a little: Critical thinkers, system builders (your "theorists"), dogmatic acolytes, dilettantes, practitioners, m...

If you think there is only one possible interpretation of metaphysical, phenomenological or epistemological statements, then I'm sorry to say it but; ...

I'm not wasting further time on your distortions.

I hope you are not falling into the dogmatic delusion that anyone who doesn't agree with you must not understand. Nothing difficult to understand ther...

This thesis is implausible; how could culture determine whether I or anyone else would class something as red or as purple or orange when it comes to ...

Two experiences of the same thing at the same time qualifies as a shared experience in my lexicon. If we shared a plate of food that would not entail ...

If we both see the same kinds of things in front of us that qualifies as a shared experience. If you saw a beach and I saw a city that would not be a ...

You beat me to it...nicely put!

That's a tricky question. Some, like Heidegger, would say that we see things as things, like we don't see a shape which we subsequently call a bridge,...

Say you are with someone and she says, "See that dog over there; what kind do you think it is?". Say it's a very large dog, maybe a Great Dane. Do you...

The unknowable itself is semantically empty, but the fact that there is an unknowable is what enables and enriches the infinite scope of the human ima...

The thing is that the importance of mathematical and literary contributions are easier to assess than philosophical contributions. As you note there a...

This reads like an appeal to authority. I don't think Wittgenstein's contributions to philosophy can be compared to Shakespeare's contributions to poe...

All what layers? There is an imaginable logical distinction between the world as experienced and the world in itself is all. Would you want to claim t...

I haven't said it is a fake world. The real world independent of human experience produces the real world of human experience is how I would character...

Perhaps there is a different kind of (non-discursive) fullness in that emptiness. In any case it is a matter of personal predilection, not something t...

Of course we do see and touch and describe the world: the world of human experience. But there is something apart from, beyond, outside the ambit of, ...

Yes, but I'm not talking about desktop icons and computer files. I don't think it's a good analogy.

It's not clear what position you are saying has been refuted. I'm not sure if you're referring to the idea that the empirical world is a collective re...

We know there is a world that gives rise to our perceptions and understanding of an empirical world of objects. Anything we say is going to be framed ...

I'm not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing with what you've quoted there...

Sorry I missed your response earlier. I understand dasein as "being there"; it must be a kind of awareness, even if not reflexively self-aware. I agre...

I agree; I think our experience is not dualistic, but is inevitably discursively framed to be so due to the inherently dualistic nature of language. "...

What exactly is the "metaphor" and the "pseudoproblem" you think it "structures" you are trying to get out of? What exactly does structure mean in thi...

I'm not seeing any point here to respond to, which you should understand, even if only on the basis that you seem to think language so indeterminate. ...

Yes we are naive realists in a sense because we naturally and pre-reflectively just accept the phenomenal world as a given. We are truly naive realist...

It's a claim about the ordinary everyday world of experience. I'm not claiming that we represent any particular X, or anything weird; we don't know su...

You are jumping from perception to the symbols we use for communication. Of course symbols, unless they are icons or pictographs, don't resemble what ...

Here is the exchange in question: The point made by Dfpolis seems reasonable enough. If you disagree with the actual point why not say why? Then you m...

The "grounds" that support what seems to you are the "grounds" that seem to you to be such. It is the same with everyone; you're nothing special.

The question as to whether thoughts exist eternally could be approached from the perspective that any thought I might think is a logical, physical and...

Cute joke! How could music be better than it sounds? I guess it could be intellectually, harmonically sophisticated even though being unlistenable. I ...

I don't see that they are any more blurry than anything else. Speaking for myself, I, at least, have a clear idea of cause and effect. All you're sayi...

Whaever gives rise to the collective representation of a world does so reliably, else there could be no collective representation. That is all we know...

I don't find Hoffman's arguments convincing. The criticism that his position cannot be consistently derived from, or supported by, evolutionary theory...