Miscellaneous Chatter > Philosophy & Science
The taboo against meaning?
sciborg2:
--- Quote from: H on July 15, 2019, 09:19:45 pm ---
--- Quote from: sciborg2 on July 15, 2019, 09:13:33 pm ---So it's relations all the way down? It seems there has to be relata?
Also it seems we can say some things about relata, insofar as we can speak of things-in-themselves?
--- End quote ---
Hmm, I don't know. What could we speak of that would not need something else (related) to explain what it is? Would this not be "Substance?" If so, what could it be?
--- End quote ---
I think knowing exactly what it is would be different than the logical reasoning for its existence? It seems Causation, at the least, is tied to that which we call Things-in-Themselves? For there to be relationally measured behaviors that we extrapolate into Laws of Nature there have to be relata acting out behavior we then circularly hold as obeying the Laws?
H:
--- Quote from: sciborg2 on July 15, 2019, 09:53:24 pm ---I think knowing exactly what it is would be different than the logical reasoning for its existence? It seems Causation, at the least, is tied to that which we call Things-in-Themselves? For there to be relationally measured behaviors that we extrapolate into Laws of Nature there have to be relata acting out behavior we then circularly hold as obeying the Laws?
--- End quote ---
Hmm, this is likely out of my league. But if all things are only things in relation to other things, then there could not be a thing-in-itself, because what would that be? In other words, if there was nothing relational to It, It would have to be Everything, no?
But also, if things only behave in a way, relational to each other, then the relationship is the thing we are describing, not the quality of the thing-in-itself. Because, since it only appears relationally, behaves relationally, then what are we describing but the relation?
This doesn't seem right, but also, I'm not sure how it is wrong, per se.
SmilerLoki:
--- Quote from: sciborg2 on July 15, 2019, 09:53:24 pm ---For there to be relationally measured behaviors that we extrapolate into Laws of Nature there have to be relata acting out behavior we then circularly hold as obeying the Laws?
--- End quote ---
Not necessarily, no.
Here, you assume that there are discrete noumena, but it also all might be the same, just looked at from different angles and distances. This way, it's already non-reducible. As in, there is no difference between Noumenology and Phenomenology.
sciborg2:
--- Quote from: SmilerLoki on July 15, 2019, 10:07:22 pm ---
--- Quote from: sciborg2 on July 15, 2019, 09:53:24 pm ---For there to be relationally measured behaviors that we extrapolate into Laws of Nature there have to be relata acting out behavior we then circularly hold as obeying the Laws?
--- End quote ---
Not necessarily, no.
Here, you assume that there are discrete noumena, but it also all might be the same, just looked at from different angles and distances. This way, it's already non-reducible. As in, there is no difference between Noumenology and Phenomenology.
--- End quote ---
Apologies as we may be taking the discussion above my intellectual pay grade but are you arguing for Idealism?
I'm fine with that, but doesn't that make objects within consciousness the relata? It's just there is no substance outside our phenomenology...right?
SmilerLoki:
--- Quote from: sciborg2 on July 16, 2019, 12:30:04 pm ---Apologies as we may be taking the discussion above my intellectual pay grade but are you arguing for Idealism?
--- End quote ---
Not likely!
--- Quote from: sciborg2 on July 16, 2019, 12:30:04 pm ---I'm fine with that, but doesn't that make objects within consciousness the relata? It's just there is no substance outside our phenomenology...right?
--- End quote ---
Not at all, though my position would be conductive to idealism, except ideals would also be relative, however strange that sounds. Just the most basic form of relation.
I'm arguing against discreteness, in a simplified and at the same time more concrete form my position would be close to the concept of universal wave-function (but with much less focus on many worlds, though by no means excluding them):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_wavefunction
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version