[MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

Fri Feb 9 05:42:43 PST 2007

Micah,
I'm just trying to understand your point of view, I 'm not trying to
irritate you, honestly,
I'm intrested in getting it, I think I'm beginning to understand.
This is important, if three of us are'nt getting your point  then
obviosly there is an important point
To be gotten ...I've been reading about Fichte and his idea of the
"self-posited I" this is why I'm on this
Subject and genuinely interested with where you are with this. I feel
objective reality is primary
Because of a "collective agreed continuity of interpretation" Fichte's
"the self-posited I" concept if
Not adding anything else  to philosophy did add this which I feel is of
note in this defense,

Fichte had this to say:

"The I posits itself insofar as it is aware of itself, not only as an
object but also as a subject, and 
finds itself subject to normative constraints in both the theoretical
and practical realms, e.g., that 
it must be free of contradiction and that there must be adequate reasons
for what it believes and does.
 Furthermore, the I posits itself as free, since these constraints are
ones that it imposes on itself.
 Next, by means of further reflection, the I becomes aware of a
difference between "representations 
accompanied by a feeling of necessity" and "representations accompanied
by a feeling a freedom" - that
 is, a difference between representations of what purports to be an
objective world existing apart from
 our representations of it and representations that are merely the
product of our own mental activity. 
To recognize this distinction in our representations, however, is to
posit a distinction between the I
 and the not-I, i.e., the self and whatever exists independently of it.
In other words, the I comes to 
posit itself as limited by something other than itself, even though it
initially posits itself as free,
 for in the course of reflecting on its own nature the I discovers
limitations on its activity."
First, the I posits a check,  on its theoretical and practical activity,
in that it 
encounters resistance whenever it thinks or acts. This check is then
developed into more refined 
forms of limitation: sensations, intuitions, and concepts, all united in
the experience of the things
 of the natural world, i.e., the spatio-temporal realm ruled by causal
laws. Moreover, this world is 
found to contain other finite rational beings. They too are free yet
limited, and the recognition of 
their freedom places further constraints on our activity." 

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Micah
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:01 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

Ron,

I see where you, Case, and Platt misinterpret me. "Objective reality"
doesn't mean reality is primary. Objective has a different meaning than
primary. Not only do they have different meanings, they're spelled
different. Now there is no "objective" way to show reality is primary,
we would need to be present to prove it is primary, which is a
contradiction.

Reality is objective - not in my head, it however is not primary...I
could go on or you could read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
by Robert Pirsig. I am just restating what he said at his breakdown or
breakthrough on "quality". You know Plato, Aristotle and the horns of a
dilemma.

A forum on Pirsig filled with people that don't understand Pirsig. Cool!

Micah

----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org]On Behalf Of Ron Kulp
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 3:12 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

[Ham]to Micah]
For example, on 10/10 you stated (again to Ian) that "...nothing can be
>shown to exist independent of humans.  Man is the measure of all
things."
>On the same day you said to Arlo:
>> People have died, and reality still exists. But when the last human 
>> dies, reality cannot be shown to exist.

[Micah]to Platt}

So now let me understand, you say "it is true that the inference of
independent existence cannot be demonstrated", so you agree that nothing
can be shown to exist independent of  humans? Meaning the statement is
fact regardless of your faith? Isn't that objectivity?

On what day, of your everyday experience, have you experienced reality
to exist independent of humans? Everyday I wake up, my right ankle hurts
for an instant, I believe it is a angel pinching me for good luck -
should I doubt that philosophically, after all it's what I believe and
you have stated I shouldn't doubt my beliefs.

You have too much clutter, and that clutter is your faith. And you won't
let go...so there you are.

[x],
It would seem that Micah is the measure of all things, if reality
independent of humans can not be proven, Reality outside of Micah can
not be proven either and if he believes this, he IS the measure of his
universe.

[Micah]
Complete misinterpretation of what I said, it's bad enough when I put my
foot in my mouth - it's worse when you put your foot in my mouth.

[x]
Well,
I got the idea you were making a case for objectivism to support "humans
gain objective knowledge from perception by Measurement". But you seemed
to overlook the fact that "Objectivism holds that there is a
mind-independent reality".
Other than that I'm not sure where you were going with Rand.

you are well known for your stance On the idea, "man is the measure of
all things" and " nothing can be shown to exist independent of  humans",
it has become your mantra. You stated it was objective "fact". If this
is not the case and I am Misinterpreting your argument then I sincerely
would like to understand.
 I did'nt put my foot in your mouth so much as I pointed to the tree
where you appearantly hung yourself.
No matter how you spin it, you can not make a stand on " nothing can be
shown to exist independent of  humans".
It just doesent seem to work .

moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/