so you see you are deluding yourself if you think you are apprehending anything you could call a "whole earth".... there is no such thing you are apprehending.... nothing but your prejudicial delusion.
You may say it exists "in principal".... but I would go on to ask you how you know that and how you would prove that... I would also ask you -what- you know and -what- it is you are asserting exists...... furthermore, I would remind you that you misapprehend or fail to apprehend this "whole earth" you postulate as existing 'in principal'.... and that you never will..... and finally I will say that your "in principle" = your misapprehension... and that if anything exists outside of that it cannot be known and consequently nothing ever will be able to rightly be called a "whole earth" so this "whole earth" of yours amounts to nothing more then a misconstrued and superficial phantom of your imagination. If no whole earth can be known... then the concept makes no sense and has no value. On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:23 AM, B Soroud <[email protected]> wrote: > "What do you believe in then? I thought it was the phenomenal world, but > the above sounds like immaterialism or solipsism." > > I am neither a immaterialist nor a solipsist... don't try to conveniently > label me. I wouldn't call myself a phenomenalist per se..... but if anything > I highly value the human experience in the aesthetical and existential sense > as far superior or more valuable and real (to me) relative to all > cosmological view-points.... i think any totalizing view-point essentially > kills actual existence.... it snuffs it right out.... obscures it out of > sight devalues it. We kill the earth, to find nothingness in the heavens. > (this is debatable, and we can continue debating) > > > "For what evidence or reason do you postulate the only universe that exists > is the one you happen to be in? Is this not a little chauvinistic?" > > The only thing that matters is my personal experience as a mortal local > being and the value I derive from it.... not some far off speculative > pseudo-conception or mind-game.... mind-games are cool, I just don't take > them that seriously... or at least not the particular one you presented. > > "Earth is my delusion? Please provide some more explanation or > justification for what you mean by this." > > I mean there is no Earth you are aware of that is absolutely apprehended > and comprehended in some fixed and objective and ultimate form.... all you > have is your own puny and distorted idea or point-of-view about something > unknowable. > > In other words, no one has actually seen the "whole earth".... and no one > ever will. > > Perhaps Gorgias was in some way right, when he asserted: > > 1. Nothing exists; > 2. Even if something exists, nothing can be known about it; and > 3. Even if something can be known about it, knowledge about it can't be > communicated to others. > 4. Even if it can be communicated, there is no incentive to do so. > > I think this is very interesting and not entirely empty. > > > > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
