-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
can we ever escape from naive realism?
- Thread starter naveed
- Start date
Eudaimonist
I believe in life before death!
- Jan 1, 2003
- 27,482
- 2,738
- 58
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Don't be so naive!
But, seriously, I don't see why that would be such a challenge. Please explain the difficulty.
eudaimonia,
Mark
Upvote
0
Eudaimonist
I believe in life before death!
- Jan 1, 2003
- 27,482
- 2,738
- 58
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
I'd like to know that too, but it usually means the philosophical error of believing, for instance, that the color blue is intrinsic to objects that appear blue to us.
eudaimonia,
Mark
Upvote
0
DaisyDay
I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
- Jan 7, 2003
- 42,496
- 20,351
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Unitarian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Did you ever read "The Interaction of Color" by Josef Albers? I found it fascinating just how relative our perception of color is.
Upvote
0
Received
True love waits in haunted attics
Realism -- at least the extreme forms -- essentially denies the role of subjectivity in determining the final way something is perceived. As said above, color is a great example. There is no such thing as "red" out there, yet it isn't entirely "in here" either, but rather a synthesis of subjectivity and objectivity: I perceive a surface with light reflecting off of it, which interacts with the rods and cones in my eyes to determine what color something is. Relative rods and cones constitutions determines relative colors perceived by the individual. There ain't no such thing as color "out there" -- that's a ghostly world of Kantian things-in-themselves, which I believe does exist, but you can't really say anything about it, because it's a "qualityless existence," and we only know things according to their properties and qualities. "What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence."
By extension, the rods/cones/color analogy can be applied to pretty much everything. Minimally, size determines how something is perceived and labeled. I see a phone; a molecule would only "see" other molecules, the concept of "phone" having absolutely no reality for this entity. This doesn't mean that there is no "real" out there, or that "real" is merely the interaction of subjectivity and objectivity (although the morphology of the term "exist" is interesting: "existere," "to show forth"), but that whatever *is* out there is "colored" by the constitution of the perceiver. Like Aquinas said, reality is presented in the mode of the perceiver.
By extension, the rods/cones/color analogy can be applied to pretty much everything. Minimally, size determines how something is perceived and labeled. I see a phone; a molecule would only "see" other molecules, the concept of "phone" having absolutely no reality for this entity. This doesn't mean that there is no "real" out there, or that "real" is merely the interaction of subjectivity and objectivity (although the morphology of the term "exist" is interesting: "existere," "to show forth"), but that whatever *is* out there is "colored" by the constitution of the perceiver. Like Aquinas said, reality is presented in the mode of the perceiver.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
