Radical Experientialism Scrapped: My Last Post

  • Thread starter Les Sleeth
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Radical
In summary, the conversation discussed the concept of personal knowledge and how it is defined as information from reality that is directly experienced and retained by consciousness. There was confusion over the definition of personal knowledge and personal experience, as well as the impact of mentality on personal knowing. Ultimately, the speaker decided to scrap the thread and revisit the topic in the future.
  • #1
Les Sleeth
Gold Member
2,262
2
Scrapped :redface: . . . see my last post.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I'm sorry I tried... but I got totally lost...

:confused:A minor point first...

Les Sleeth said:
Part One - Definitions

Personal Knowledge defined: Information from reality directly stimulating consciousness that is personally sensed, experienced and retained by consciousness.

Shouldn’t this say "past information…………retained and cecalled by conciousness", otherwise I don't see a diference between your personal experience and your personal knowledge definition


Then the important part ... this is how I got lost... :confused:
Les Sleeth said:
Part Three – Conclusion

While overall personal knowing can benefit from the peripheral assistance of mentality (depending on the quality of it),
How is this... since personal knowing is that which is retained, isn't this the other way around like you state in the next sentence
Les Sleeth said:
because mentality relies on and is conditioned by past experience,
past experience = personal knowledge
Les Sleeth said:
it means the experience of the present is weakened.
when is this weakened and which part does it refer to?? :frown:

Les Sleeth said:
Consequently, during the actual moments of thought processes, the experience of personal knowing is diminished.
Lost again... is experience of personal knowing the same as personal knowing ?? otherwise this one's new in the equasion.
Les Sleeth said:
Therefore, for the practice of radical experientialism, one maintains personal experience as the first priority of consciousness. For mental operations, one relies on the experiential classes as much as possible, and returns to the personal experience of the present as soon as possible after thinking.
I think I get this part, but It will come as no surprise that I have no idea how to handle this...:
Les Sleeth said:
The claim is, the more fully a human experiences the present, the deeper one's personal experience of knowing.
:uhh:

Les Sleeth said:
(NOTE:Adding my own personal experience to that I’d say, the more quiet the mind, the greater the experience of the present.)

Loud and clear, won't agrue that... there's only a limited amount of information that can be handeled by our neuronal processor at the same time :biggrin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
Sho'Nuff said:
Shouldn’t this say "past information…………retained and recalled by consciousness", otherwise I don't see a difference between your personal experience and your personal knowledge definition

You are correct about almost everything. I'd worked on this throughout the weekend and decided to post while I was tired. Sorry, everyone, the concept is not ready for publication. :frown:

However, I am still have high confidence in my overall premise, so let me fix the logic and definitions so it makes sense (tomorrow though, my brain is shot now).
 
Last edited:
  • #4
I decided it was best to scrap this thread. :redface: Sorry everyone, I know what I meant to say, but I missed it by a mile. :cry: I'll try again in the near future for those who are interested. It's something I believe and practice, so I am pretty sure I can make sense. :tongue2:
 

1. What is "Radical Experientialism Scrapped: My Last Post"?

"Radical Experientialism Scrapped: My Last Post" is a blog post written by a philosopher discussing their personal journey towards rejecting radical experientialism as a philosophical concept.

2. What is radical experientialism?

Radical experientialism is a philosophical theory that states that all knowledge and truth can only be attained through personal experiences and perceptions.

3. Why did the author scrap radical experientialism?

The author scrapped radical experientialism because they found it to be limiting and incomplete as a philosophical concept. They also realized that it was not a practical approach to understanding the world.

4. What are some critiques of radical experientialism?

Some critiques of radical experientialism include the idea that it neglects the role of reason and logic in understanding the world, and that it is too subjective to be a reliable source of knowledge.

5. What other philosophical concepts did the author explore before rejecting radical experientialism?

The author explored various concepts such as rationalism, empiricism, and skepticism before ultimately rejecting radical experientialism. They also considered the role of intuition and perception in understanding the world.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
800
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
802
Replies
9
Views
976
  • Chemistry
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • General Math
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top