To: | "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | William Frank <williamf.frank@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Mon, 27 Jan 2014 14:35:41 -0500 |
Message-id: | <CALuUwtBb7AteGo_ZQyduLuc8voLQ59vncK3ED2facyBJsJySnA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Rich Cooper <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
what **they experience** is different. Nobody would disagree. That is, The
constraints that limit my life and different than the constraints that limit
your life, Nobody would disagree with this either, and therefore reality is different for me than for you, and vice
versa.
Put on blue glasses, everything IS blue. Have a second baby, some things actually CHANGE their sizes. No way to determine if they are REALLY a different color, if thing have REALLY changed their sizes. There are no spectrometers; there are no tape measures. (because, if I have funny glasses on, I might misread the tape measure. Therefore, there is no right way to read the tape measure, all are equal. Therefore, everything acutally HAS every size that anyone believes it has. So, why bother to use a tape measure in the first place?)
In a funny movie, laurel puts on blue glasses, and he says, "hey hardie, Everything is blue!" Most people would say, 'when I put on blue glasses, everything LOOKS blue." They, and those watching the movie, know that laurel has blue glasses on. Most people seem to recognize the difference between what they experience and the underlying facts that might cause those experiences, and always cause them to differ. But most people must be wrong. They don't realize, whatever we believe, is true. What's blue for me is red for you. End of story. You are assuming that because we experience two different things, we are experiencing two different underlying root causes for those experiences, instead of them being different aspects of a whole. but even though I feel the elephant's trunk, and you feel its tail, it might still be one elephant. One could never PROVE that it is one elephant, one can contrawise never prove that they are different elephants, either. This is the difference between emperical evidence (what we can prove or disprove) and logical necessity (what we must accept as the foundation for a communications event to have the possiblity of having a meaning if nothing is shared, there is no meaning). It is logically necessary that we go on the assumption that there is a single reality we can share, one that we can only get closer to, as we communicate more and more, though of course we will never get all there way there. This matter is one to which experiment does not apply. It is not an empirical matter. It is a matter of logic, of what must be the case if it makes sense to even TRY to communicate.
_________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (01) |
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology is affected by Personality, Rich Cooper |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology is affected by Personality, John F Sowa |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology is affected by Personality, Rich Cooper |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology is affected by Personality, John F Sowa |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |