creativesoul

Of course that's 'the way it is', because I merely stated a consequence of what you're arguing for. If you believe that touching fire is not directly ...

Our overall worldviews/positions are very close to one another. I think perhaps the differences can be teased out in our respective notions of mind. H...

So, there's only two choices? Indirect realism/perception and naive realism? Nah.

Hmm... Like the motion sensor outside my shop. There's an evolutionary gulf between single celled organisms and us.

So, by definition then... how convenient. Reminiscent of the 'hard' problem.

Here is an example of disqualifying us from directly perceiving by using our biological machinery and how they work as reason. Makes no sense to me. T...

Senses include neural events.

Why must one know what it is they are perceiving in order to be perceiving it? That makes no sense.

It sems to me that some arguing against direct perception use the complexities of biological machinery as 'reason' to deny direct perception. Others i...

I am interested in dropping the description and unhelpful arguments about what's "real". Seems the approach I've offered allows that to happen and foc...

Belief determines/underlies actions.

Well, it may help to begin by not categorizing everything as belief.

Hmm. Could you spell out what is being eliminated and how that is done? I assume it makes more sense of direct realism.

"Maps and territories" seems apt here. I'm afraid I'm no longer as hopeful about this conversation as I once was.

Either Bernie Sanders' worldview is not rightfully called "a populist" one, or the title is refuted.

Sure. Ghosts are characters in fairy tales/explanations. Fairy tales/explanations persist via linguistic tradition. Some people believe in fairy tales...

Ghosts are real in the sense that when they/we think about ghosts, they're/we're affected/effected by those thoughts. Seems to me anyway...

That which is real has affects/effects.

:yikes: Evidence/remnants/consequences of linguistic bewitchment(radical skepticism/idealism). We spoke earlier about this. The trees are in the Missi...

I think that the latter is existentially dependent upon the former, but not the other way around. Seeing a green apple as a green apple is both percep...

I'm curious if you'd show me how I'm equivocating.

My first thought as well... Perhaps by "reason" he means truth conditions must be met?

Not what I said. I'm making the point that to see the green apple as "a green apple" requires language use, whereas seeing the green apple does not.

Weird that you're claiming to look at a world independent of humans and in doing so claim to be abke to directly see that which is imperceptible to th...

I think your use of "perception" is stretched beyond sense ability. We do not perceive mental concepts. This does mark at least one of the aforementio...

That's not right though. I'm talking about seeing trees and your talking about knowing about that. A capable creature need not know that they're seein...

You need not know that your belief is true in that case in order for it to be so.

That requires knowing how to use the word "green" to pick out green things. Knowing how to use the word "green" requires knowing how to use language. ...

I've done that to help make it clear what I'm asking. So, I'd like to read your answer to the question above. There's also more you wrote a few days b...

Seems you and I are largely in agreement on direct perception, which did not really surprise me.

If we draw enough meaningful correlations between green things and other stuff, we can become conscious of green things. That's not the same as being ...

Not all discussion requires argument. I like to think we've helped one another in some way. If it weren't for you and other folks like you, Idah been ...

Nice stuff recently!

We're not smelling our subjective individual conscious experiences. We're not tasting the way coffee appears/interacts to/with our biological machiner...

:smile:

I've not a single issue with that.

The last claim makes no sense to me. It leads to all sorts of nonsense. Are they seeing Cypress trees or are they seeing the way the Cypress trees app...

Hey M! Causal. Biological machinery(physiological sensory perception). I'm curious how you would fill out your answer.

Must we? I find trouble with your manner of putting things. :yikes: The aforementioned notion of mind is hard at work here. I suspect we work from sev...

You and I can look at the same river. We both see the same river at the same time. We can both isolate a heron to the exclusion of all else. What on e...

There's a notion of mind there that not all direct realists hold.

Whence the need for omniscience?

What sits between the lemon and the creature's smelling?

Touche' :razz: It's not about punctuation use...

May I suggest Davidson's Anomolous Monism or his paper in the early 70's or late 60's, "Mental Events" which has a very basic argument, undeniable rea...

The irony... It's Critical Theory, not 'Critical Race Theory'. You should read it.

Show that Boltzmann brains are not equivalent to normal human observers.

Greetings. Sorry for the delay. They'll likely come often. Life and all. I really appreciate all your interest. Perhaps this could be the beginning of...

Well, we say that memories are stored. It is common parlance. It's a useful but very misleading analogy. I suppose what I'm getting at with this point...

Talking as if memories are distinct entities, things that can be stored, seems mistaken to me. Without a tree there is no memory of one. Our memories ...