• Mww
    2.7k


    Yeah, but that may be just to dig a deeper hole. Being human can be a general objective proposition, a universal form if you’re into the Greek thing, which reduces technically to empirical anthropology insofar as it covers all of us, or, maybe (sputterchokegasp) psychology. Still, the only way to even think about it, is from being A human, which is a strictly Enlightenment thing, which reduces to proper subjective metaphysics.

    Pick yer own poison, I guess, right?
  • Thunderballs
    204
    An analysis/critique:

    Yeah, but that may be just to dig a deeper hole.Mww

    That's what philosopphy is all about: Diggin holes.

    Being human can be a general objective proposition, a universal formMww

    It can be. To me, being human is the full realization of the potentialls Nature offers us, in the sattisfied and fulfilled knowledge (whatever that means) that the gods are quietly contemplating their creation of eternity and infinity. Being human can be universal or Solar-systematic.

    if you’re into the Greek thingMww

    I like their old ancient gods. These turned into one super monster by Xenophanes and this laying the foundations for the modern notion of one scientifically investigable reality is less sattisfactory.

    empirical anthropologyMww

    Scientific culture should be subjected to it!

    sputterchokegaspMww

    Poetry!
    A human, which is a strictly Enlightenment thing, which reduces to proper subjective metaphysics.Mww

    I don't agree. A human is more than a thing..

    Pick yer own poison, I guess, right?Mww

    Cheers mate!

    :smile:
  • Mww
    2.7k
    I think that this reflects the distinction that I draw between the objective homo sapiens which I am, and the subjective "I".Michael Zwingli

    Agreed, in principle. I would agree unequivocally, if you’d left off the “which I am”. Whatever “I” am, “I am” not an objective homo sapien.
  • Mww
    2.7k
    Good analysis/critique. Something else philosophy is all about.

    Except....there’s always one, seems like....

    A human, which is a strictly Enlightenment thing, which reduces to proper subjective metaphysics.
    — Mww

    I don't agree. A human is more than a thing..
    Thunderballs

    ....”thing” here relates, albeit euphemistically, to “Enlightenment”, not a human.

    The only human “thing”, is its body, as says.
  • Michael Zwingli
    158
    . I would agree unequivocally, if you’d left off the “which I am”. Whatever “I” am, “I am” not an objective homo sapien.Mww

    :up: strike "which I am", and add "which represents my physical reality".
  • Alkis Piskas
    388
    Is that all you have to say? People often do that after I said something. Saying goodbye.Thunderballs
    You said "To give a fresh recount is always productive. You say yourself you changed."
    OK? Bye again!
  • Alkis Piskas
    388
    It seems that I was misapprehended in my understanding of your premiseMichael Zwingli
    What premise exactly?
  • Michael Zwingli
    158
    What premise exactly?Alkis Piskas

    I had though that you premised the statement that "you are not your body" upon the "you" representing the subjective self, but apparently I was wrong. You will have to inform me of what said "you" represents within that statement, which is why I asked above:

    So, when you state that "a man is not his body", you are defining "a man" in the objective sense...as a real object in physical reality? If not, then how so?Michael Zwingli
  • Thunderballs
    204
    You said "To give a fresh recount is always productive. You say yourself you changed."
    OK? Bye again!
    Alkis Piskas

    But what's the change? Change in the true reality
    The only human “thing”, is its body, asMww

    Indeed! But what a thing! Neither matter neither soul. But both at the same time! Between the soul of the brain and the matter of the outside physical world! With eyes to see and cry and express, ears to hear, a mouth to speak, shout, and sing, and two hands to type you this. All informative patterns with an entropy value that expresses not much.
  • Thunderballs
    204
    ....”thing” here relates, albeit euphemistically, to “Enlightenment”, not a human.Mww

    But if human is an Enlightenment Thing, aint it a thing? Whats an enlightenment thing? A way of enlightened thinking (according to science and scientific ratio)? Is a human founded in enlightenment?
  • Mww
    2.7k
    But both at the same time!Thunderballs

    And yet....attempts to reduce metaphysical dualism to a non-starter, continues.

    Whats an enlightenment thing? A way of enlightened thinking (according to science and scientific ratio)?Thunderballs

    A way of thinking yes, but not necessarily according to science, but instead, according to the principle sapere aude.

    Is a human founded in enlightenment?Thunderballs

    Hmmm. This can only be answered as a matter of opinion, and mine would be.....these days, with the current evolution of technology and empirical knowledge in general, basically he is, but practically, he may not like to admit it.
1678910Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.