This is my brain on... reality.

[Wezil]

Okay, fair enough. I'm too tired today to deal with any sort of critical thought.

[Pekka]

How could you really be critical of my subjective perception of my position regarding to this theory? I mean, that would be kind of ridiculous.

It is the same as if I was having "critical thought" of someone who says "I drove a car today. I think it was fun."..... nothing to analyze. I mean sure, depends what you want to do with it, you can analyze even that but... oh well, time to go to bed, read and fall asleep. Tomorrow is a new day.

[Wezil]

Um, no.

[Pekka]

No what? Hmm, you seem to piss be losing your mind.

[Pekka]

Oh well, promised i'll sleep soon so.. better stop the gossip and really relief myself from being piss tired.

[Perfection]

Originally posted by Pekka
Yes, in the very next paragraph. My OP was solid man, you can't complain.

Dense would be a more apt adjective.

[Blake]

Originally posted by Pekka Oh well. Maybe I'll go and read something. I need to read. Yes. More. More. MOOOOOOOORE!!!

Books Books Books
Too many Too many Too many
Dustbin Dustbin Dustbin
-- Zen Monk


Dude, clear your head . Reading more books just clutters it more.

[Straybow]

Originally posted by Perfection

Originally posted by Pekka
Yes, in the very next paragraph. My OP was solid man, you can't complain.

Dense would be a more apt adjective.

Impenetrable.

[Pekka]

Well, seems like I have 2 days more where I can just go to the library and read about perception of reality. Nice. I'll go crazy today, get the outrageous classics.

Madness, it is only one step away from truth.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Blake
Books Books Books
Too many Too many Too many
Dustbin Dustbin Dustbin
-- Zen Monk


Dude, clear your head . Reading more books just clutters it more.

Ignorance.

[Heraclitus]

The thirs for knowledge is admirable. And some people have more room up there than others...

But be careful about the way they affect your personality, you must be a stern dissector of meanings and a very creative personality to resist the mind numbing effect of heavy reading (even a book every two days is too much for some).

As Neizsche said: "Many a man fails to become a thinker only because his memory is too good. "

EDIT.Embarasing spelling. So what?! I was rushed.

[Pekka]

Heraclitus and in some way others as well:

That's a good point, however, I think the point is somewhat moot. I mean of course it's possible to drive yourself crazy or simply not understand or remember all you read, so it doesn't really matter, OR you remember and understand but it becomes conflicting with itself and there's just too much back and forth and mixing things up, agreeing and denying and it's just a big blob after that.

I think there is such knowledge that helps dealing with these problems. Like I said, I like to read about the history of different sciences, I like epistemology, it puts things into perspective in their historical context. So you can understand why some schools of thought or some theories were born. I mean they often do reflect what happens in society, like for example sociology and all these theories with Marx and others at the time... it was a time of industrialization, the beginning of capitalism and so forth, so that became interesting.

You didn't necessarily have big cities where people moved, you didn't have rural places that became.. well rural and with few old people holding their hammers and going "where the **** did everyone else go?". Living in cities gave totally new ways people did things, thought about others, formed groups and everything.

So.... those were, in a sense, very very new times with big changes in all aspects of life, it was very real. You would have these theories and views about class society, workers and the upper class, all kinds of classes that made people different and it was descriptive of those times in most cases.

So that makes things into perspective, the reasons behind certain observations. You can also see them same things in art.... paintings, songs, books etc. So in a way many things kind of reflect the times they were happening.

I think these are good things to know, plus, how sciences interract, this helps putting things in order, for example knowledge of reality, it's not just a big group of different theories and views that all are so different from each other. Some of them criticize each other, so it's also helpful to read about that and the debates between people and authors. Those are usually my favourites, when two people who happen to be alive at the same time go and duke it out in verbal and rational battle.

It's not so much about "finding what the truth is". I mean what is truth anyway? So to me it's just alternative views that either support this or that. It forms a body of knowledge rather than group of individual and separate things (so in this sense it's important to know how the order of things became like it is).

[VetLegion]

It's not so much about "finding what the truth is". I mean what is truth anyway?

See where reading modern French filophsofres got you?
That's plain bull****. Herr Ratzi was right, dictatorship of relativism is well under way.

I applaud your interest in history of science, I also have a (small) interest in that topic. Mine is closer to the earth though, I've tried to determine how science and technology historically interplayed to create modern world. It seems science wasn't very important for economic growth until recently. What got us out of 0.01% annual GDP growth by launching the industrial revolution were practical tinkerers, not deep thinkers. Of course, it's not clear cut as some men were both, but I'm going off topic.

Epistemology is something else. It's meta, and meta is cool. But that's certainly a hobby, I can't understand how you could possibly apply that in your work (which is computer security if I recall correctly).

[Pekka]

So you think everything that I say is from modern French philosophers? Well, that's where you're wrong.

And you didn't even understand the point I made about the truth. It was about how reality is constructed and meanings are given, so it doesn't touch the idea of objective nature so much, and how we can empirically study, say for example physics. So from the sense of our perception of reality, truth doesn't matter, because it doesn't fit the context in the traditional way.

It is like asking a car how does it feel if there's a problem starting it. You know? Totally irrelevant, but I wouldn't still go on a rampage crying that "YOU DENY THE EXISTENCE OF FEELINGS?".

Epistemology itself doesn't really help me in work, it's more like something of a hobby.

Dictatorship of relativism, besides, points to a totally other issue. So you're mixing things up here, it doesn't apply on this thread. Quite the contrary.

[VetLegion]

Right, I go through the trouble of reading your thread and I don't even get a ... T-shirt

You also mentioned Focault which is for me a keyword for "I'm not so much about going anywhere with these words I'm saying but I do enjoy listening to myself". I dislike that attitude.

On the other hand philozofy for most people is (in my opinion) not about reaching a goal, but about travelling the path. The very complex brains we have sort of force us to use them even for purposes they originally weren't invented for.

You are travelling your path, but unless you make some sort of claim you want to defend (and I find it interesting enough to refute) I can't contribute anything more to this thread.

I think I deserved my T-shirt