To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Opiated
From: "David G. McDivitt" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 11:06:00 -0500

When you say "realism" is what exists without us, that is the classical
view. It is also an authoritarian and god oriented view. By saying this I do
not mean to imply you are a theist, but culturally we are reared within
whatever intellectual environment.

Have you read any complexity theory? Reading this put me on the subject. It
is an alternative to determinism, but has much in common with determinism.

Since you think in terms of a fixed, preexistent, external reality I
challenge you to spend a few moments and visualize a representation of that
reality as a deterministic model, then possibly some other model such as
complexity theory.

In language things are treated as objects, with each having whatever
definition. When thinking or speaking we pick these objects off the shelf
and use them in concepts (thinking) or sentences (speaking). All is an
intellectual exercise. Referring to intellectualism in this manner is not a
refutation of feelings or emotion, but recognition of the fact mankind is
where it is today, differing from other animals, due to increased brain
functionality, with feelings and emotion included in that functionality.

Assuming we use objects in our thoughts and speech, is not reality an object
as well? So when we use the word "reality", what is the significance of that
word? What does it mean? What intellectual construction does it represent?
Of all the words present in language, to think there would be one primal
word or concept which has not evolved the same way as other words, is
ridiculous.

If reality is an intellectual construct, then reality is established by
logic, instead of logic being established by reality. When one considers the
philosophical implication, to have reality established through logic is much
less subjective than the other way around. In other words, being able to
logically establish what is real is a much more ethical statement than
saying logic must be dependent on what is real. Who is to say what is real?
By what authority?

There is of course the rhetorical statement, "If one falls off a ladder and
hits the ground, such is more real than logical." But not really. In some
other culture great significance might be attributed to simple events, and
after all, we do learn about gravity in school. The manner in which climbing
is coupled with falling is a logical exercise. Isaac Newton constructed a
great deal of reality in this regard for us. What about all the people who
have been killed through religious persecution, due to very aggressive
constructions of reality? Where is the boundary between scientific verbiage
having to do with the so-called physical world, and reality statements from
other categories of thought? To the religious, God is as much a truth as the
atom.

The point is to construct a metaphysical model inclusive of all truth
statements spoken by anyone. Criticism of this might be that such would not
really say anything, is impractical, is far fetched, Quixotic, etc., etc.,
but if one considers the lack of subjectivity such a model would offer, the
logical structure might be worthwhile.

The model might start off with the statements:
- I am alive.
- You are alive.
- I think.
- You think.
- I have an opinion.
- You have an opinion.
- Sometimes we are in agreement and work together. Sometimes we don't.

Who would this model not work for? There is of course the person who likes
to tell others what to do. No, it would not work for him. There is the
person who likes to tell others what to think. No, it would not work for him
either. What else do I need to identify myself as a being? Is the fact I am
alive enough? Is the fact I can think enough? Do I need to have the earth,
universe, and purpose for humanity explained? No, I do not.

Our individual realities are similar due to similar education and cultural
upbringing. The fact we become stuck on the idea one external reality exists
for everyone, irrefutable, without exception, is in my opinion a hold over
from our cultural heritage, which is the authority of God or gods. This was
a time when men were not perceived to live for their own sake, but for the
sake of however many supreme beings, the which were merely projections of
human sentiment anyway.

So, I have my own reality. It is one I have constructed myself and am happy
with. I challenge anyone to tell me I do not have my own reality, and I
challenge anyone to tell me why I should not have it.





>From: mc <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 21:26:33 -0500
>
>"David G. McDivitt" wrote:
>>
>> I think we have much in common. I debated for a good while on an anarchy
>> list. From outright anarchy they finally came up with "controlled" anarchy.
>> My response was this controlled anarchy would end up being no different than
>> the civilization we already have which took thousands of years to evolve.
>> And since it evolved, what we have is the best or most efficient possible
>> having all factors discounted.
>===========
>mc
>I, too, have debated anarchists and nihilists... I see them as political
>Dadaists. Anarchists are the first to find a sewer when trouble breaks out
>and they're the first to pillage and plunder after the dust settles... it's
>a cowards way that wants the cake and eat it too.
>================
>>
>> Elitist sophistry? Hell just call it patronization or ass-kissing.
>>
>> We may have a different use for "metaphysical". Yes, some use it to mean
>> spirituality or supernaturalisms. I do not. I pasted dictionary definitions
>> below. In my opinion a metaphysical view is one's own cosmological or
>> spiritual view, giving reason to why all things exist. There are various
>> metaphysical models.
>>===============
>mc
>My use of the word is philosophical. Most of my debate days were in college
>and philosophy was one of my minors. I was an active person in those days...
>and in those days, I was on the defense. I consider those things metaphysical
>as a discovery and exploration of the self and that there is no manifestation
>of it in nature or existence.
>==============
>> The standard reality model is very easy to reduce once one begins looking at
>> it with that purpose in mind. Pick any supposedly physical object and
>> deconstruct it. Question definitions regarding it, which are cultural or
>> scientific. Identify component parts and speak in those terms instead. Speak
>> in terms of different uses for the object. On the further reaches of
>> science, what actually exists becomes vague and theory only.
>===============>
>mc
>Yes... but it is also the realm of art, imagination, and the creative
>process. We are matter that thinks... there is an intrinsic connectedness
>to our existence, a bond in which we understand, underneath all the cultural
>hype and determinism, that we are from it, of it and that we are part
>of its process...
>===============
>> What is the shape of the leaf on that one branch on that one tree over in
>> the forest? What leaf? What tree? The point is, that particular knowledge
>> does not exist until some question has been asked requiring it. All
>> knowledge is need based. As we interact with our environment we require
>> answers to questions. We choose data and answer those questions to the best
>> of our ability. Those answers either remain or they do not, based on their
>> survivability only, and whether they continue to meet a need. There is not
>> one piece of knowledge in existence which was not needed at some point in
>> time, and that knowledge was created to satisfy that need. Creation in this
>> regard is a logical or mental construct. It is not so much that we are out
>> discovering nature, as if on a perpetual field trip, but we live in an
>> intellectual world of language and definitions, and we create new language
>> and definitions which are representative of our interaction with our
>> environment. So what is physical? What does exist? As we examine things to
>> meet different need, they change. Do you wish to speak in terms of atoms and
>> molecules? What are atoms and molecules?
>================>
>mc
>I think in different terms. All of knowledge is already available. We have
>but to discover it. It is ours but for the proper question. I would point out
>that any good investigator knows that many things come to light as a result of
>stumbling upon them. Some of the greatest discoveries of mankind happened when
>by accident in totally unrelated investigations. We are opportunistic creatures.
>
>We think in words. Existence is a process, it as we, are dynamic and like water
>we seek, we pressure, we cause and we take advantage.
>===========
>> The difference between a logical based metaphysical model and a reality
>> based metaphysical model, is that the only thing I take for granted is that
>> I am alive. Whatever I think, feel, or experience beyond that point is
>> intellectual in nature. We are intellectual beings more than we are physical
>> beings. The fact we might even call ourselves physical is an intellectual
>> construct.
>===============>
>mc
>"Take for granted"  Realism is what is exists without us.
>
>We are a total being. Mind and body... one sensing unit with many parts
>that soak in the environment and convert what it senses into terms it
>can use to exist. Separating its parts and viewing them as independent
>is counter productive.
>====================
>> Anyway, I want to write a large scale essay about this. I still don't have
>> all the points in place. I explain it each time I have opportunity, and each
>> time I'm challenged I'm able to go a bit further with it.
>=============>
>mc
>Excellent. I would be interested in the tact you take.

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?b1deYl.b1lD1n
Or send an email To: [log in to unmask]
This email was sent to: [log in to unmask]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com