Micah, I'm just trying to understand your point of view, I 'm not trying to irritate you, honestly, I'm intrested in getting it, I think I'm beginning to understand. This is important, if three of us are'nt getting your point then obviosly there is an important point To be gotten ...I've been reading about Fichte and his idea of the "self-posited I" this is why I'm on this Subject and genuinely interested with where you are with this. I feel objective reality is primary Because of a "collective agreed continuity of interpretation" Fichte's "the self-posited I" concept if Not adding anything else to philosophy did add this which I feel is of note in this defense,
Fichte had this to say: "The I posits itself insofar as it is aware of itself, not only as an object but also as a subject, and finds itself subject to normative constraints in both the theoretical and practical realms, e.g., that it must be free of contradiction and that there must be adequate reasons for what it believes and does. Furthermore, the I posits itself as free, since these constraints are ones that it imposes on itself. Next, by means of further reflection, the I becomes aware of a difference between "representations accompanied by a feeling of necessity" and "representations accompanied by a feeling a freedom" - that is, a difference between representations of what purports to be an objective world existing apart from our representations of it and representations that are merely the product of our own mental activity. To recognize this distinction in our representations, however, is to posit a distinction between the I and the not-I, i.e., the self and whatever exists independently of it. In other words, the I comes to posit itself as limited by something other than itself, even though it initially posits itself as free, for in the course of reflecting on its own nature the I discovers limitations on its activity." First, the I posits a check, on its theoretical and practical activity, in that it encounters resistance whenever it thinks or acts. This check is then developed into more refined forms of limitation: sensations, intuitions, and concepts, all united in the experience of the things of the natural world, i.e., the spatio-temporal realm ruled by causal laws. Moreover, this world is found to contain other finite rational beings. They too are free yet limited, and the recognition of their freedom places further constraints on our activity." -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micah Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:01 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?) Ron, I see where you, Case, and Platt misinterpret me. "Objective reality" doesn't mean reality is primary. Objective has a different meaning than primary. Not only do they have different meanings, they're spelled different. Now there is no "objective" way to show reality is primary, we would need to be present to prove it is primary, which is a contradiction. Reality is objective - not in my head, it however is not primary...I could go on or you could read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert Pirsig. I am just restating what he said at his breakdown or breakthrough on "quality". You know Plato, Aristotle and the horns of a dilemma. A forum on Pirsig filled with people that don't understand Pirsig. Cool! Micah ----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ron Kulp Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 3:12 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?) [Ham]to Micah] For example, on 10/10 you stated (again to Ian) that "...nothing can be >shown to exist independent of humans. Man is the measure of all things." >On the same day you said to Arlo: >> People have died, and reality still exists. But when the last human >> dies, reality cannot be shown to exist. [Micah]to Platt} So now let me understand, you say "it is true that the inference of independent existence cannot be demonstrated", so you agree that nothing can be shown to exist independent of humans? Meaning the statement is fact regardless of your faith? Isn't that objectivity? On what day, of your everyday experience, have you experienced reality to exist independent of humans? Everyday I wake up, my right ankle hurts for an instant, I believe it is a angel pinching me for good luck - should I doubt that philosophically, after all it's what I believe and you have stated I shouldn't doubt my beliefs. You have too much clutter, and that clutter is your faith. And you won't let go...so there you are. [x], It would seem that Micah is the measure of all things, if reality independent of humans can not be proven, Reality outside of Micah can not be proven either and if he believes this, he IS the measure of his universe. [Micah] Complete misinterpretation of what I said, it's bad enough when I put my foot in my mouth - it's worse when you put your foot in my mouth. [x] Well, I got the idea you were making a case for objectivism to support "humans gain objective knowledge from perception by Measurement". But you seemed to overlook the fact that "Objectivism holds that there is a mind-independent reality". Other than that I'm not sure where you were going with Rand. you are well known for your stance On the idea, "man is the measure of all things" and " nothing can be shown to exist independent of humans", it has become your mantra. You stated it was objective "fact". If this is not the case and I am Misinterpreting your argument then I sincerely would like to understand. I did'nt put my foot in your mouth so much as I pointed to the tree where you appearantly hung yourself. No matter how you spin it, you can not make a stand on " nothing can be shown to exist independent of humans". It just doesent seem to work . moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
