Three Seas Forum

the archives

dusted off in read-only


The Case of the Blind Brain and Other Strange Tales posted 05 July 2004 in Philosophy DiscussionThe Case of the Blind Brain and Other Strange Tales by Replay, Auditor

Eternal objects, not external.

My mistake.

Well, they are timeless in that they do not "age," nor do they change with "time" (which is an EO itself). They are, basically, "outside" our time and space coordinences (which are manifestations of EO themselves). Mountains rise and fall; the experience of "red" is eternal.

Interesting. I can see what your saying, but have to wonder if this is necessarily true. For instance, from a certain point of view red did not exist back when there were only primative lifeforms on the earth. It was only until animals with eyes developed that red actuallly appeared (and perhaps not even then as quite a lot do no see colours the way we do).

Red is just a part of our developed ability to see light in different phases. You have to wonder though if we had developed differently wether we would see something else (quite possible as there a people who are colourblind who already do this).

Whether the experience of red is eternal or not though does not matter all that much in the end. As I said it is just a function of light and our ability to see it, and as such is interconnected. I think it would be a mistake to focus on things such as this whilst not looking for the very thing that gives us the ability to percieve red in the first place.

The same thing can also be said of time. It is just a function of the what you could call the movement of the universe. It is not really something that stands "outside". Again, it would be much to look at what it is that moves the universe and not the byproducts of it.

It sounds like dualism to me. Presuming the "It" isn't the material world itself, then the "It" would have to be an outside agency that interacts with the physical to "create" the mental world.

No it's not dualism. I know it can seem that way though as on one hand you have this "force" and then it seems on another you also have this energy that it interacts with. It is something i used to struggle alot with, but it can be resolved.

You might want to check out 'Zen and the art of motocycle maintenace' by Robert M, Prisig (can find it online in a lot of places). He had some interesting ideas on this, and whilst I don't think he truely grasped it, from an intellectual point of view he certainly came up with one of the better theorys.

You should read Whitehead; he is the epitome of philosophical jargonized frustration. He had the annoying tendency to make up his own terminology (as there were no pre-existing words for the concepts he described - ex. "Actual Entity," "Aggregated Society", etc) and then not explain what he meant by them. Or, if he did explain what they meant, he did so in an earlier work and assumed anyone who was reading his current work had read those previous ones. That's why it's best to read Whitehead only after you've read some descriptions of his terminology.

Think I'll pass <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) -->

Can understand that is neccersary though. Language was never really designed to explain the underlying nature of reality and instead is more used to describe just the surface of it. I doubt Whitehead is as hard to read as Dogen though. Not only does he use new words, he combines existing ones, twists sentances around, and even contradicts himself on purpose. It makes for very hard reading. Once you get a sense of what he is doing though, its almost enough to make you stand in awe of the way he does it. Perhaps I'll post something on him soon. view post


The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown