|
@FateOfTwist_ | |||||
|
An absolute world which is fundamentally inaccessible, only approximated, is an incoherent concept (ie. It is semantically unstable, and the resolution of that instability ends with pure empty contradiction)
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
The general way to chase down that instability is:
1. See what comes to mind when you think of it or its features, or of how you know of it, or of how you approximate it, or of how you originally came to understand things being organized so that the idea was necessary
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
2. For all of that, because of the inaccessible nature of it, any time where you think of this absolute world, you are not thinking if it, but if your best approximation of it, a model of it. It's just a model.
3. Do the appropriate substitution
4. Repeat til destruction
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
I kinda don't like contradictions like this. A lot of people, including myself a few years ago, thought of objectivity, reality, appearance, doubt and certainty in terms of this idea, and removing it leaves us also with no reflective understanding of these concepts
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
Negative destructive views are easy, positive views are much more difficult. I don't have complete positive views for all of this, and the ones I do need lots of words. I can talk about it if you ask. This view is common and I think it's somewhat harmful/blocking
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
I want this contradiction out there and I want discussion about it to help build the positive views and argue and articulate myself. This is I think an important starting point.
So, sorry for the contradiction and semantic emptying.
But
A few directions to start:
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
When a concept has lost its reflective sense, it can be tempting to throw it away, say it is illusory, incoherent, etc. We've done this with "absolute reality" in a complete and methodological way
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
But we did not do such a complete and methodological emptying of "real" and "objective" and "appearance". These are not philosophical terms of art like absolute reality.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
Despite nonsystematic reflective emptying via emptying philosophical concepts our reflective understanding is dependent on, we still use them in the practical ordinary everyday, and it is there where they still have sense, and it is from there that a postivie view can be rebuilt
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
There is still an objective real world, it's just not what you thought it was.
Things can be illusory or just appearance, but how that works is maybe not how you thought it did.
You can be certain, and you can doubt, but these might not work how you thought they did
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
If your conception of an absolute world was based on scientific theory in some sense, then I would recommend reading this
mobile.twitter.com/FateOfTwist_/s…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
Here's a general positive take on ontology
mobile.twitter.com/FateOfTwist_/s…
|
||
|
|
||