S
STT
Guest
This is strange: We are either aware (through deduction) of the fact that we experience or we experience experience. Which one is correct?
- Status
F
friardchips
Guest
What sources are you getting all the info. for your threads, from? I would seriously like to know what it is you are studying.
C
Crusaderbear
Guest
Excellent question!
Half the time I would just like to know what the OP is saying!
R
reggieM
Guest
Is English not his native language? Some posts seem like they’ve been processed through Google translate.
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
I wish people would quit responding to this guy. It is a bunch of b…
S
STT
Guest
Mostly it is the result of my personal thinking or the result of discussing thing with others.
I am currently studying philosophy personally.
S
STT
Guest
What is that?
S
STT
Guest
Sorry. I just started to read philosophy so most of the sources that I study are basic. I can give the list if you wish.
S
STT
Guest
Here is the list of books that I read partially or completely. I download them from www.b-ok.org.
MIND:
Mind A Brief Introduction By John R. Searle
The Rediscovery of the Mind By John R. Searle
A introduction to the Philosophy of Mind By E. J. Lowe
The Conscious Mind By David Chalmers
Philosophy of Mind Classical By David Chalmers
Cognition Exploring the Science Daneil Reisberg
Phenomenological Mind. An Introduction to Philosophy of Mind By Andrew Baily
PHILOSOPHY:
Philosophy and Philosopher An Introduction By John Shand
I hope that is useful.
V
Vic_Taltrees_UK
Guest
Hi STT.
Definitely both! (though I wouldn’t discount the possibility raised by someone of a third thing or more - IN ADDITION).
I love it that you are asking these things. Human beings are destined to be curious, let’s go for it and fulfil it.
Since I was aware that I am a neurology patient, I constantly want to ask people a related question, “how do you experience experience?” Sadly those who influence the world the most take their own and others’ faculties for granted. How much better a place if the faculties of others could be respected.
Definitely both! (though I wouldn’t discount the possibility raised by someone of a third thing or more - IN ADDITION).
I love it that you are asking these things. Human beings are destined to be curious, let’s go for it and fulfil it.
Since I was aware that I am a neurology patient, I constantly want to ask people a related question, “how do you experience experience?” Sadly those who influence the world the most take their own and others’ faculties for granted. How much better a place if the faculties of others could be respected.
S
STT
Guest
Most of the time. No need to say that there is big controversy in philosophy especially philosophy of mind.
Very rarely. Most of my threads is the result of my own thinking or the result of discussing related topic with friends in here.
V
Vic_Taltrees_UK
Guest
When you’ve time, check out a wider range of findings on mind.
For example Donna Williams and Wendy Lawson, who are autistic like me, have written extensively demonstrating that autistic psychology is exactly like everybody else’s psychology, only slower. “Neurotypicals” have generally missed the essence of psychology because they don’t see the joins or hear it clunk!
Similarly, Kate Kelly & Peggy Ramundo have written about ADD which is an opportunity to sharpen mental organisation and management skills. I call it “attention difference experience”. Same issues as everyone, personalised opportunities.
Furthermore, not only all the senses but all language is symbol-based, much of it several times over. Hence our minds are in many-layered symbolic mode all the time. The symbolic mediates (transmits) reality, it doesn’t replace it.
For example Donna Williams and Wendy Lawson, who are autistic like me, have written extensively demonstrating that autistic psychology is exactly like everybody else’s psychology, only slower. “Neurotypicals” have generally missed the essence of psychology because they don’t see the joins or hear it clunk!
Similarly, Kate Kelly & Peggy Ramundo have written about ADD which is an opportunity to sharpen mental organisation and management skills. I call it “attention difference experience”. Same issues as everyone, personalised opportunities.
Furthermore, not only all the senses but all language is symbol-based, much of it several times over. Hence our minds are in many-layered symbolic mode all the time. The symbolic mediates (transmits) reality, it doesn’t replace it.
V
Vic_Taltrees_UK
Guest
I am thrilled at many of STT’s (and others’) questions and comments, they happen to mesh in with matters I am highly enthusiastic about.
Also let’s not forget that every stranger that posts represents many more, worldwide, that just “lurk”, we should offer them all food for thought and further exploration. Good questions are good questions. A forum is here especially for offering to other human beings information surely! To welcome is a precious service.
Please don’t incite the moderators into another of their periodical Genghis Khan-like frenzies of deleting entire threads people have taken trouble over!
V
Vic_Taltrees_UK
Guest
At a quick glance on Wikipedia it seems Chalmers has missed on the symbolic nature and functioning of language which I myself have referred to.
At a cursory glance at Searle on the same site I get a feeling Searle’s approach to intentionality, rationality, the subjective/objective are roughly similar to mine.
The subjective is itself an objective fact, that’s why courts of law invite testimony - to convey in that way some substance - and why I keep saying we know, really, more than we are alleged to know.
At a cursory glance at Searle on the same site I get a feeling Searle’s approach to intentionality, rationality, the subjective/objective are roughly similar to mine.
The subjective is itself an objective fact, that’s why courts of law invite testimony - to convey in that way some substance - and why I keep saying we know, really, more than we are alleged to know.
S
STT
Guest
Thanks for the reference.
- Status