Enneagram Type 5 Board Archive

Re: Personhood

Re: Personhood

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Type 5 Message Board ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Sambersil on September 13, 2000 at 20:48:53:

In Reply to: Re: Personhood posted by isaacthe54 on September 13, 2000 at 02:41:27:

Whoa! Some comment! Let's see if I can respond to its points:
1.) Excuse my ignorance, sorry. I don't read much philosophy, I just think it. What is "solipsism"? From what you've been saying, it seems to be the consideration of reality as without real stuff in it. You'd never know it from my posts no far, but I DON'T think this, although I used to. I consider our world solely perceptions, unadulterated perceptions. They are truly real; the basic tenet of this part of my thinking is that information (perceptions) verify their own existence. Getting information means you know you get the information. I've considered this to be possibly false, too; the knowledge of getting the information must be information as well, and there must be knowledge of this as well, and so on ad infinitum. Seemingly, we don't have this much useless information kicking around. Maybe that argument is valid, though I have now discarded it. It's just more intuitive to me to think of everything as perception. In this context, the question "Is reality 'real'?" just means "does the nature of the information I receive through my senses agree with the information I receive from my thoughts/worldview?" Not necessarily, but this is fairly unimportant. Reality is completely real, because we know we have perceptions, and they compose our entire reality.

2.) Your stuff about thinking: I discard it entirely. In this perception-oriented view of the world (Is it solipsism or not?) all action, including thinking, is just certain types of perception or information. The actual action is not necessarily there. The actual action is just what our worldview tells us is happening. We do NOT know we think, despite however much it may seems so. As a matter of fact, right now I am perceiving a memory of practicing meditation last summer until I could stop thinking completely for a second or two at a time - sort of mentally holding my breath.

3.) Your stuff about forgetting philosophy and living normally: I agonized for years over this until I came up with the "law of mistakes". If you haven't already, read my post "Logic is dumb". With this in mind, I am able to discard philosophy temporarily when I don't think I can live by it, and I don't feel at all ashamed of myself for not living logically. Really gave me some peace of mind!

4.) I shoulda put this under #1, but I am thinking of it now. I don't think that what I believe about perception/information would be solispsism, because you used the word "thinking" in a serious manner in talking "solipsistically"(that a word?), and not just to say it doesn't exist. To be true to my philosophy - well, you read number 2.

5.) OK, let's get one thing straight. Here is what I PERSONALLY believe to be people (defined by me as anything that gets info): any system of cause and effect. I WOULD say that computers are people, though perhaps not ones that perceive anything like we do. The reason I believe this (I posted this before somewhere but I forget where) is because science tells us that perception with the outside world is just a set of interactions between our senses and the world. Science also tells us that thought (or as I would say, "thought-perception" if I wanted to be really nitpicky) is a system of cause and effect too. So's just about everything in our body. Where there is a lack of cause and effect, our perceptions fade; we don't have direct interactions involving most of ourselves with, say, rocks; consequently, we don't have rock-perceptions unless we specifically put ourselves in sensual contact with rocks (heh heh, I just realized what the end of that sentence could be construed to mean). This belief isn't strictly logical; its more scientific (though not truly scientific) or belief- based. It's a BELIEF as opposed to a logical FACT. (and yea, I think that logical facts are just beliefs too, but I made this distinction before I made that "law of mistakes", and I still keep it. No reason to discard it on the basis of it being illogical - my "law of mistakes" could be a mistake too. It doesn't force change because it invalidates EVERYTHING even itself.

6.) Ya know, we don't have any other basis for deciding what personhood is other than what we are. We are the only examples we have to observe, and we have to deduce the existence of other people from ourselves; thus, if stuff isn't like us, we won't call it a person. (By the way, since a lot of people define themselves by their thoughts, alien thinkers MIGHT be classed as people by some humans, even if they don't look like us, if they think like us)

LOVE your in-depth response; I always like vigorous discussion!

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: Whoa! Some comment! Let's see if I can respond to its points: : 1.) Excuse my ignorance, sorry. I don't read much philosophy, I just think it. What is "solipsism"? From what you've been saying, it seems to be the consideration of reality as without real stuff in it. You'd never know it from my posts no far, but I DON'T think this, although I used to. I consider our world solely perceptions, unadulterated perceptions. They are truly real; the basic tenet of this part of my thinking is that information (perceptions) verify their own existence. Getting information means you know you get the information. I've considered this to be possibly false, too; the knowledge of getting the information must be information as well, and there must be knowledge of this as well, and so on ad infinitum. Seemingly, we don't have this much useless information kicking around. Maybe that argument is valid, though I have now discarded it. It's just more intuitive to me to think of everything as perception. In this context, the question "Is reality 'real'?" just means "does the nature of the information I receive through my senses agree with the information I receive from my thoughts/worldview?" Not necessarily, but this is fairly unimportant. Reality is completely real, because we know we have perceptions, and they compose our entire reality. : 2.) Your stuff about thinking: I discard it entirely. In this perception-oriented view of the world (Is it solipsism or not?) all action, including thinking, is just certain types of perception or information. The actual action is not necessarily there. The actual action is just what our worldview tells us is happening. We do NOT know we think, despite however much it may seems so. As a matter of fact, right now I am perceiving a memory of practicing meditation last summer until I could stop thinking completely for a second or two at a time - sort of mentally holding my breath. : 3.) Your stuff about forgetting philosophy and living normally: I agonized for years over this until I came up with the "law of mistakes". If you haven't already, read my post "Logic is dumb". With this in mind, I am able to discard philosophy temporarily when I don't think I can live by it, and I don't feel at all ashamed of myself for not living logically. Really gave me some peace of mind! : 4.) I shoulda put this under #1, but I am thinking of it now. I don't think that what I believe about perception/information would be solispsism, because you used the word "thinking" in a serious manner in talking "solipsistically"(that a word?), and not just to say it doesn't exist. To be true to my philosophy - well, you read number 2. : 5.) OK, let's get one thing straight. Here is what I PERSONALLY believe to be people (defined by me as anything that gets info): any system of cause and effect. I WOULD say that computers are people, though perhaps not ones that perceive anything like we do. The reason I believe this (I posted this before somewhere but I forget where) is because science tells us that perception with the outside world is just a set of interactions between our senses and the world. Science also tells us that thought (or as I would say, "thought-perception" if I wanted to be really nitpicky) is a system of cause and effect too. So's just about everything in our body. Where there is a lack of cause and effect, our perceptions fade; we don't have direct interactions involving most of ourselves with, say, rocks; consequently, we don't have rock-perceptions unless we specifically put ourselves in sensual contact with rocks (heh heh, I just realized what the end of that sentence could be construed to mean). This belief isn't strictly logical; its more scientific (though not truly scientific) or belief- based. It's a BELIEF as opposed to a logical FACT. (and yea, I think that logical facts are just beliefs too, but I made this distinction before I made that "law of mistakes", and I still keep it. No reason to discard it on the basis of it being illogical - my "law of mistakes" could be a mistake too. It doesn't force change because it invalidates EVERYTHING even itself. : 6.) Ya know, we don't have any other basis for deciding what personhood is other than what we are. We are the only examples we have to observe, and we have to deduce the existence of other people from ourselves; thus, if stuff isn't like us, we won't call it a person. (By the way, since a lot of people define themselves by their thoughts, alien thinkers MIGHT be classed as people by some humans, even if they don't look like us, if they think like us) : LOVE your in-depth response; I always like vigorous discussion!

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Type 5 Message Board ] [ FAQ ] type5board/messages/507.html

Your Ad Here