creativesoul

I've no idea what you meant then. Could you rephrase your first reply to me tonight?

I'm going to keep you on your toes! Either mountain experience is not subjective, experience is not subjective, or mountain experience is not experien...

How about addressing what you did say, and my response to what you did say?

Looks like I repeated a mistake already made. Copy and paste a misattribution repeats the mistake. My fault. Original above... Edited later to add the...

:brow: Do you see the problem here?

If you remain consistent, you'd be forced to say that you cannot get a grasp upon anything pre-conceptual.

If you re-read the entire post, you'd see that I said "if"... C'mon Janus... you know better.

Some of the everyday things we talk about are those external things. I'm not even sure what you're trying to ask me here. Trees aren't reducible... ar...

Does one's philosophy have the burden of following all of the conventional distinctions? :brow:

I think that that's a fairly accurate albeit rough summary of the difference. However, some left populism doesn't vilify ownership so much as elected ...

Well of course. All sorts of people say all sorts of stuff all the time. Language use can be perfectly sensible and say stuff that's dead wrong.

Don't you see a problem here, my friend? Seriously, I like the shit outta you(that's an endearing Appalachian American colloquialism), so I'm not bein...

How do you know this? That is... how do you know what experience is beyond conscious experience? I think you may be conflating causality with experien...

I think you'd change your mind if you carefully considered the logical consequences of that argument. It leads to a reductio.

It is inherently inadequate for taking proper account of that which consists of both. Experience is one such thing.

Surely you're not really going to forward such an argument?

Perhaps it would be easier for me to understand what "mountains experience erosion" is taking about on your view if I knew what criterion you employ a...

Coming from someone who has demonstrated a habit of ignoring all the tough questions leading up to a refutation of their own claims... well... that's ...

That is what can happen if one does not have the basics of complex experience right. Mountains do not have what it takes. Anthropomorphism.

First of all, I've never said that the objective/subjective dichotomy was incoherent. Secondly, I am referring to the typical use of that distinction....

Are logical forms taking those thoughts and reasoning into account as well?

We're in agreement, it seems...

So, don't say that... See how easy it is to solve some of these historical problems of language use? Language use is not the sort of thing that captur...

So, there's clearly a difference between the world and our thought and belief about it? I agree.

Not much to say aside from we're working from incommensurate notions of what counts as "complete". An incomplete account can be true. I agree. I do no...

Set it out... this difference between world and.... what, exactly are you claiming must be different than the world? Our image... as retinal?

It doesn't follow from the statement "We've been mistaken about some things" that we've been mistaken about everything. It does not follow from the st...

The world, perhaps? :meh:

And the world... :brow:

True explanations are often incomplete. Incomplete explanations are not complete accounts. If we make a true statement about a tree, the tree has not ...

Ah. I separate from certainty when it comes to the origen of everything. I also do not require omniscience for knowledge of X. That said... Spinoza on...

Not following this... What counts as "substance" will determine whether or not there can a plurality. This seems irrelevant to the topic at hand. Help...

That doesn't follow unless everything we may describe counts too.

No. I mean stop using the subjective/objective dichotomy as a means to take account of experience. It cannot take proper account of our own thought an...

Yes. Do we form, have, and/or hold true belief about nature? Are our beliefs about nature true? "Nature" here - for me at least - refers to the univer...

Gotcha. Notta problem. So, you are arguing against the historical archaic version of realism. Have fun, but just so ya know, there have been much bett...

Stop using it to do things we cannot do with it.

Analysis of what it takes for "mountain" to represent serves us better.

Analysis of how use naming and descriptive practices as a means for talking about mountains would serve us better.

Well, it's a problem with how we're talking about the world and/or ourselves. Typically, I fix such problems by changing how I talk.

Given I've made so many different remarks here recently, I'd like to 'hear' what you find to be exactly right. :smile:

I agree that that's the real problem. Where we will inevitably disagree is how to solve the problem.

Well put. Elegant. This realist's position most certainly does. After all, everything ever thought, believed, spoken, written, and/or otherwise uttere...

Ah. :smile:

Could be a poetic way of talking about the good affects/effects that we sometimes have upon others... Maybe?

Using to refer is mention.

I agree with that. Our judgments are largely informed by our own thought and belief. Notta problem though, we can get stuff wrong in that we can most ...

Design presupposes a designer... Same ground. Logical possibility.

I'm a realist in the sense that I strongly believe that some things exist in their entirety prior to our awareness of them.

Nature doesn't draw lines. We do, and we can be wrong sometimes, depending upon what we're delineating. If you agree then what's the issue?