?

Log in

 

this sentence might be false - Mysterium Tremendum

About this sentence might be false

Previous Entry this sentence might be false Mar. 8th, 2004 @ 02:38 pm
CROSSPOST
OPTIONS

1. there is an objective reality and we can know things about it
2. there is an objective reality and we cannot know things about it
3. there are more options that i cannot comprehend

from the fact that i observe anything it seems to follow that there is an objective reality that i am experiencing in some way filtered through sense perception. if there were only the perception and no reality, then the perception would be the reality. the statement "there is neither perception nor reality" seems like the other option, and it seems that i can't even contemplate this statement without bathing it in perception and nullifying it. which doesn't mean i can say that it's an invalid way of describing reality (or that there are no other options), hence #3 above.

"cogito ergo sum" is too definitive a statement for me, though. why does descartes use his theoretical tricky demon to cast doubt on his sense perceptions but forget that such a demon could also influence him in a way that makes him think he is reasonable when he is not? or, for that matter, make him believe that reason is a valid tool for describing reality?

all i really feel comfortable saying about reality is
it seems as though something is happening.

anything else is just guesswork.

sense perception is a code. language is a code. pure thought is a code. the idea of "the" is a code. the idea of "of" is a code. the idea of "is" is a code. the idea of "a" is a code. the idea of "code" is a code. the idea of "idea" is a code.

it seems that unacceptance is not the same thing as assertion, though at other times in my life i've thought that it was.

am i looking at my eyes or am i trying to bite my own teeth?

STOP
Leave a comment
[User Picture Icon]
From:platotron
Date:March 13th, 2004 08:47 am (UTC)
(Link)


4. There is no objective reality and knowledge is a survival-mechanism.


[User Picture Icon]
From:mehrheit
Date:March 13th, 2004 02:59 pm (UTC)
(Link)
but like i said, contemplating rationally the statement "there is no objective reality" seems impossible. this one is still #3 for me. is it not for you? can you elaborate?
[User Picture Icon]
From:platotron
Date:March 14th, 2004 08:36 am (UTC)
(Link)
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.
[User Picture Icon]
From:mehrheit
Date:March 14th, 2004 09:32 pm (UTC)
(Link)
fuck.
[User Picture Icon]
From:sulla_collina
Date:July 14th, 2004 09:56 pm (UTC)
(Link)
5. Whether or not there exists an objective reality is irrelevant, being that my subjective reality is content to remain subjunctive.
[User Picture Icon]
From:mehrheit
Date:July 15th, 2004 10:12 am (UTC)
(Link)
in fact we're pretty much saying the same thing here; when i say that there are further options that i cannot comprehend, that doesn't mean i'm discounting those options. it might be fair to say that i favor them. you'll never catch me saying that comprehension precludes inaccuracy.

but there are, of course, days when "content" means "terrified." AND THEN WHAT
(Leave a comment)
Top of Page Powered by LiveJournal.com