--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It was I who started this shitstorm with a not-so-simple word! But in > my own defense it also started some interesting discussions about what > it means to "know" reality. > > I actually posed it as a question to you Jim. And I want to be clear > that I would never sum up the concept as "exceptional egotism." If > that were true it would have implied a putdown that was unintended. I > was trying to point out that if I understood you correctly concerning > your creation of objects perceived (feel free to correct however I > have mangled your POV) the implications lead to solipsism which is > used in philosophy more as a cautionary tale of a direction of > thinking than a proposal for a POV to be adapted.
I am not sure that a S. POV needs to be adopted. That there are natural's. And not psychotic. Regardless, this discussion has let me slip in and out of that view. One thing that is clear from that view is that Everything is projection. Which is not a dis word. One can project positive, neural and negative things in one's perception of the "dream people" out there -- which are really ME. And projections of my style of perception, epistimology, biases -- particularly confirmation bias, cognitive errors etc. And at the core of some of the discussion is the "when a tree falls in the forest and no one is around, does it make a sound" -- thing. Even "is the tree even there". I think yes, which is counter to what I understand Jim's view is. Correct? Is the tree not there?
