Lee Corbin writes:
The realist does *not* want the world to be "as it seems to be". No,
the realist focuses on the fact that a wholly independent world "out
there" exists and existed before he did. In fact, it is the subjectivists
who start calling their own unassailable introspections "reality".
The only real problems about perception and subjectivity are scientific
ones, having to do with the way that brains create models of (outside)
reality and also of themselves in it, and also---often to the point of
diminishing returns---models of themselves thinking about their
> But subjectivity is certain.
Since the only thing that is certain is "I think therefore I am" or
"...I am thinking", it's not a stretch to say that no worthwhile
knowledge is certain. All knowledge is conjectural. To be fair,
you should google for "Pan Critical Rationalism" if you have not
already read up on it.
"Currently, Pancritical Rationalists are people who believe that there is an
external reality but that they will never be sure they know it, that no
position can be positively justified but it is quite likely that one, (or
some) will turn out to be better (closer to reality) than others in the
light of critical discussion and tests. This type of rationality holds all
its positions and propositions open to criticism."
In other words, you believe that there is a real physical world (because
this theory has great explanatory power and is absolutely consistent with
every experience you have ever had, as well as the fact that it is obvious
and intuitive), but if evidence should come to light showing that the theory
is wrong, then you'll change your mind. Is this correct? I can't see much
that could be found objectionable in this position.
Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!