Dushan S
Member
This hell I am talking about.Cythraul said:^ What the hell are you talking about?
As it kills by its very nature the idea of having intellectual gymnastics we all enjoy (to some degree), is should not. But I thought that it is nice to offer another view at whole mind/body stuff.SPIDERMAN said:This post should have been the first one
Btw, experience of the world is technically just a bunch of impulses in your brain. Even if you on the spiritual side, again there are some kind of senses that people use to get information. So as information by itself cannot be real, we agree that if we get same pieces of code in continuity, repeatedly, this is reality... At least this is method we use to learn. So whole life is just a inner game of receiving informations from senses and reacting on them with informations that makes our body and mind react. Technically we have no contact with outer world for real, so we cannot prove or dissaprove if it is real. As we cannot have direct experience of real world by using senses, we construct our inner idea of world, our personal concepts, that definitely are NOT real. When someone is talking about world he is actually talking about his subjective concept, so two people talking about something will have illusion of understanding each other only if their concepts are simmilar, and will eventually understand some parts of other persons reality only if there is emotional sync at work, and there are some similar intensive experiences. So you have billions different concepts roaming on the planet, caged in their own little "realities" with partial contact to real world and other beings, quite scarry by the way when you become REALLY aware of situation.Well I haven't read Heidegger's work but it sounds very interesting. However from what you've put forth it is still possible that this "world" in which everything relates to one another still could be completely idealistic (all mental). We still have not been given a reason to believe anything else is real, all we have been shown is that whatever it is we see is related to one another. The idealist can simply re-contextualize to this framework. But then agian I haven't read his work, so I'm probably missing out on a lot...
So it is funny when people egoistically turn it around and judge if there is a real world, when in practice, the world is there, quite real, but we are not.
But this is another hell I am talking about