have you enumerated your axioms? For I don't see how any theory of knowledge can be achieved with none.
Lavengro
Thank you, or damn you, Lavengro. I know this wasn't directed at me but must be responded to. Version 3.2 necessarily tentative follows:
1. I exist.
That is that portion of my brain that evaluates stimuli, integrates them, and relates them to the gestalt of previous stimuli exists. Cogito ergo sum.
1.a. Spirituality exists.
Spirituality is that portion of my brain that evaluates the importance of the various integrations of stimuli. It is necessarily internal.
2. Other exists.
Other consists of that which has the potential to present stimuli to sapient beings.
2.a. Other includes the material.
That which presents direct stimuli that can be measured. The material includes the stuff of my body and brain, and that of others (people.) Reality in the material world is conformance to measurements of self and others.
2.b. Other includes the conceptual.
Stimuli from the working of the other thinking beings alive and dead, usually expressed as stories, myth and theories. It contains the integrated gestalt of individuals or groups of thinking beings. Truth in the conceptual is that which resonates with the gestalt that is me. It is necessarily subjective.
2.c. Other includes the social.
The others which by chance or choice I must allow stimuli both ideological and material from and incorporate into my existence. Morality is the ideology that permits the smooth functioning of my social reality. Morality is necessarily reflexive.
3. Other exists independently of observation.
Other exhibits changes in lapses of observation.
7 comments:
It has been hinted that the Title is somewhat arrogant. I do not apologize. I am sapient. The axioms are mine, not necessarily generalizable to all the Sapient. The link on beliefnet is now being generalized.
I used the very short-handled broomstick on Beliefnet. If I am compelled to use the larger-handled broomstick, I'll probably just use it here.
Bnet Post 7, your quote:
I will cease defending the axioms as a personal statement. They are on my blog I will defend them there.
You have continued to defend them there. It's time to defend them here while I grease the broomstick.
My resaponse on Bnet, slightly expanded
axiom: a proposition that is not susceptible of proof or disproof; its truth is assumed to be self-evident; a self-evident or universally recognized truth
JC has provided profound descriptions but they are likely not individual axioms; each of the statements appear to be a part of one conception of metaphysics.
Compare the difference with these philosophical axioms:
1. Something exists
2. Something that exists in reality, exists independently of any observation [Reality exists independent of me]
3. A thing is itself, A is A; a thing cannot be A and not-A at the same time; a thing must be either A or non-A [Laws of Identity, Non-contradiction and Excluded Middle]
4. Consciousness exists [I am conscious/aware]
5. Entities act in accordance with their natures. The same entity in the same circumstances will act in the same way [Causality]
6. I can choose [Freewill]
(1) and (2) are concerned with metaphysics but axiom (2) concerns the nature of reality. (3) concerns identity, logic, epistemology and knowledge. (4) the recognition that one is aware without having to make qualitative claims [such as "I think".] (5) concerns causality. (6) concerns Freewill.
Each is given in a form where they must be considered self-evident. Each cannot be proved true without assuming their truth and using that assumption in the proof [a circular proof.] Each axiom states a fact that can be perceived directly; [it is not induced or deduced from any other facts.
There are many other axioms available.
1,2 OK, If a tree falls in the forest it makes a noise.
3. Conceded as an axiom and frequently useful in the material realm. I do not agree with it. Particularly in the conceptual milieu.
4. Cogito ergo sum.
5,6 seem mutually exclusive. At least if you are an entity. Causality is useful in dealing with the material, but even there randomness frequently makes a lie of causality which almost useless in dealing with entities with free will.
One can deal with people or things. Take your pick. Not necessarily exclusive, but different axioms apply.
(4) is not equivalent to Cogito Ergo Sum.
"I am conscious" makes no direct reference to the "I" but is an indication of awareness. To put it crudely "you am, whether you think or not; your thinking is not your sole evidence of existence."
The others are addressed on Bnet
The OP is updated without notation as my thinking changes. For reasoning etc. see beliefnet link.
Post a Comment