Mind, matter, and dualism

Math Is Hard
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,491
28
What's the difference between the "cogito" and the "dubito"?
 
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,764
5
The dubito is the systematic doubt technique that Descartes used, and which has been adapted in modified form by later philosophers. Cogito ergo sum is the conclusion he drew from his dubito; I think therefore I am.
 
189
0
I think>>I feel>>I believe>>I know>>I AM...right ???
 
Math Is Hard
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,491
28
selfAdjoint said:
The dubito is the systematic doubt technique that Descartes used, and which has been adapted in modified form by later philosophers. Cogito ergo sum is the conclusion he drew from his dubito; I think therefore I am.
Cheers, SA. I get it.
 
3,754
2
Rybo said:
Humans --if not all animals with brain/nervous system-- think about somthing.
What does it mean to think "about something"?

Those experentioal somthings are are the only phsycial things that can be based on your experience of somethings.
What is an "experiential something"?
 
92
0
Humans think about things What do less complex animals think

Mentat said:
What does it mean to think "about something"?
What is an "experiential something"?
Mentat,
1) we must rememeber that our words will will never be 100% cocneptually accurate in defining i00% of the details of any physical experience.

2) we must remember that the first subcatgorizing of Universe is all that is metaphyscial existence and all that is physical existence,

3) that written or mathematical language is a process of conceptual expression to ourselves or others of physical experiences or concepts that are based on physical experiences.

"Experience ergo experiential"------That being said, for me as a human, a physical "experience" involves energy(energetic) at the minimal level as bosons and fermions or their ovelapping, macro-aggrgates conditions such as hadrons(protons-neutrons) as atoms(115 known), molecules(unknown quantities), substances(unknown quantities) etc......interacting with myself ergo my body in such a way that I become consciously aware via my sensoral nervous system(includes brain), or I become aware of via intrumentation(EKG), or via someone using physical methods -written word(includes picto-graphic), sound, to convey conceptual information regarding these physical "experiences"

"Something"---in relation to physical "experience", is anything energetic i.e. any in motion, 3 dimensional structural integrity. Sewe above fermnions boson or aggregates thereof.

"thinking"---process of overlap between physical experinces and accessing mind(concepts/intellect). The concept of "I" as human, thinks(thinking/conceptualizing) about the my own direct physical experiences, indirect physcial experiences via some physical technology(EKG), or not-experience experiences of others coceptually conveyed to me vis some physical method(sound, visual language).

Mentat, how would define those same questions you posed to me?

Please try and go beyond simple zen-like anwers e.g. "IS", Universe IS, it all just IS, what it IS. thought are what they are. Experience just IS.

Thanks
Rybo





.
 
3,754
2
Rybo said:
Mentat,
1) we must rememeber that our words will will never be 100% cocneptually accurate in defining i00% of the details of any physical experience.
Why not?

2) we must remember that the first subcatgorizing of Universe is all that is metaphyscial existence and all that is physical existence,
Says who? What if everything were metaphysical? What if everything were physical?

3) that written or mathematical language is a process of conceptual expression to ourselves or others of physical experiences or concepts that are based on physical experiences.
That's one theory (the Platonic one), but there are others who say that mathematics is just a formal exercise, existing abstractly of "physical experience".

"Experience ergo experiential"
Then define "experience". The way people usually use the term is simply "having done something enough times to be better at it than before" (crude definition, but close to the general meaning nonetheless). But that doesn't seem to apply here at all.

------That being said, for me as a human, a physical "experience" involves energy(energetic) at the minimal level as bosons and fermions or their ovelapping, macro-aggrgates conditions such as hadrons(protons-neutrons) as atoms(115 known), molecules(unknown quantities), substances(unknown quantities) etc......interacting with myself ergo my body in such a way that I become consciously aware via my sensoral nervous system(includes brain), or I become aware of via intrumentation(EKG), or via someone using physical methods -written word(includes picto-graphic), sound, to convey conceptual information regarding these physical "experiences"
You say that you become "aware via CNS or instrumentation or other physical method"...what does it mean to become aware via something? What is your awareness, and how does its being acheived depend on an intermediary?

Mentat, how would define those same questions you posed to me?
I wouldn't, that's the point. I honestly don't know what an "experiential something" is. As to what it means to "think about" something, I'd probably rephrase that as "direct more attention to" something.
 
92
0
Physical and metaphyscial in complemetation

Mentat said:
Why not?
Says who? What if everything were metaphysical? What if everything were physical?
That's one theory (the Platonic one), but there are others who say that mathematics is just a formal exercise, existing abstractly of "physical experience".
Then define "experience". The way people usually use the term is simply "having done something enough times to be better at it than before" (crude definition, but close to the general meaning nonetheless). But that doesn't seem to apply here at all.
You say that you become "aware via CNS or instrumentation or other physical method"...what does it mean to become aware via something? What is your awareness, and how does its being acheived depend on an intermediary?
I wouldn't, that's the point. I honestly don't know what an "experiential something" is. As to what it means to "think about" something, I'd probably rephrase that as "direct more attention to" something.
Q1) Because they are words. Words can only partially convey the whole of any physical experience. This is what sometimes makes poets seem better than others. It is ther abiltiy to convey with more completness of phsical and metaphysical experince using words.

For me the first great example of this was reading ALan Watts. I forget the name of he book but he captured with words what I and others experienced in with exquiste detail of theose feelings etc....

Q2) Bucky Fuller

Q3) I dont think everything is meatphysical but Fuller did. Mentat, do you think, it all is metaphysical?

Q4) some mathematics can exist seperate from physical experience and some mathematics complements all phyiscal phenomena.

Q5) Experience as with all words has both a metaphysical and physical aspect or connotation that it can be associtated with. E.g. I experience 5 senses via my Central Nervous System and i experience abstract thoughts(mind) as language(words), geometry(pattern), mathematics(number).

Q6) " to become aware" means you wrote me a reply message and i became aware of it via my awarness sense of visualization(EMRadiation).

Q7) "awareness" comes, or is measured in degrees i.e. various biologics are aware of the whole of physical Universe in varying degrees. Ive explained this in some previous posts a week or so back.

Q8) experiential something is anything physical expereience. Mentat thinks about something ergo Mentat expiential history and recall abilties gives him cause to have oppinions and questions both verbally(orally) and written.

All physical things that exist are experience-able ergo they are experiential somethings to another entity at some level of experience. That level depends on your perasonal definitions of who or what can have and "experience."

To some degree we may say that any two particles have at minimum a gravtitaional realtionship. Whether you want to call that minimal relationship and experience between those two particles is entirely your choice, regardless of what other may or may not share as a common agreement.

That is the freedom of mind.

Rybo
 

Related Threads for: Mind, matter, and dualism

  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
637
  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
65
Views
7K
Top