What is out there?

"i switched as a baby from a virginal state of accepting whatever is there to thinking that there was an objective world out there." -- Mark 16968

Me, too ... then later in life i changed again to believe that we humans actually have an active hand in creating whatever it is that is here, just according to what we do.  So then, in a sense, there is no "objective world out there" that we can know.

[so for me my freedom is not a sham ... it is not a lie.] <-- the thought to get to

It is important for what i am saying that i used the term "we humans" rather than simply "I" ... for i form a being within my culture and society and can no more exclude that society from myself than lamb could exclude itself from lamb stew.  (i might think of a better way to say that somday, lol)

Tags

  1. item 16968
  2. belief
  3. item 16972

Comments


Seth says
ME 2013-12-19 10:24:06 16972
seth 2013-12-19 10:19:44 16972
ME 2013-12-19 10:05:12 16972
ME 2013-12-19 09:22:25 16972
See also the epistemology of EST here
Try reading what is written above & still exists at this moment of writing.  It aligns a lot with your ontology.  I don't think starting an inquiry assuming something that is not true is a good place to start. But ignore that fire has already been discovered & enjoy the ride.

the test of it's utility between us is whether you can honestly answer the blued question above and now below too. Everybody can think in suppositions ... we do so all the time ... and that does not invalidate the thinking.  If you didn't exist, wouldn't  you consider that which was left over to be a world totally objective to you ??  I mean how could you not ... you could have had no hand in perceiving, creating, experiencing or any other activity that would make it subjective to you and have tainted it ... no you could not for you don't even exist.
Being totally free I am not going to answer your question until you read the EST thingy.


fair enough ... i have to cook lunch and deal with the fucking syrians anway.

Seth says
ME 2013-12-19 10:05:12 16972
ME 2013-12-19 09:22:25 16972
See also the epistemology of EST here
Try reading what is written above & still exists at this moment of writing.  It aligns a lot with your ontology.  I don't think starting an inquiry assuming something that is not true is a good place to start. But ignore that fire has already been discovered & enjoy the ride.

the test of it's utility between us is whether you can honestly answer the blued question above and now below too. Everybody can think in suppositions ... we do so all the time ... and that does not invalidate the thinking.  If you didn't exist, wouldn't  you consider that which was left over to be a world totally objective to you ??  I mean how could you not ... you could have had no hand in perceiving, creating, experiencing or any other activity that would make it subjective to you and have tainted it ... no you could not for you don't even exist.

Seth says
i think there is a way to define "what there is out there" in a strictly logical sense.  it is whatever exists were *I* not to exist.   In a way it is what i have called "otherness".   It is that which i am not ... and have had no hand in creating, imagining, perceiving, or experiencing.  It is that which I do not know. 

Note that this is strictly an analytic definition. 

Seth says
Objectivity in the Wikipedia has some interesting tangents.
I also provide references & quotes because I am not fond of trying to rediscover fire or re-invent the wheel.


Seth says
ME 2013-12-19 08:46:08 16972
seth 2013-12-19 07:27:13 16972
i think there is a way to define "what there is out there" in a strictly logical sense.  it is whatever exists were *I* not to exist.   In a way it is what i have called "otherness".   It is that which i am not ... and have had no hand in creating, imagining, perceiving, or experiencing.  It is that which I do not know. 

Note that this is strictly an analytic definition. 
You do exist, I think - eh?

apparently i was independently dealing with that the same time you did ... and my response below  is what i think about that "problem".

obviously "whatever exists that is not me" cannot refer to anything that actually does completely define what to me is "out there now", because i obviously do exist ... "i think therefore i am" ... and I am part of what is "out there".   but for the purposes of defining "an objective world out there" i think we can ignore that minor complexity for the moment.   the term is just being used to refer to what mark called "an objective world out there" ... and all i did was to put forth some more hints that indicates what somone must think about to know what is being thought of in this context.

Seth says
You may have an interesting take on classic dualism. There are several kinds mentioned. RS beat that to death in his Philosophy of Freedom .
I quote people now & then because they are worthy of such & have more Ethos with the World than I do. Also they have usually sutdied the content area that I quote from more than I.  In the same way, you quote yourself.
There was a random quote from RS this am which I will paraphrase it because it relates to your freedom thingy - to wit: Freedom comes when the impulse to act is drawn from your higher self.
THe random quote thingy in the elib which I did get before it disappears is:
source: ... “It will be realised — by the public mind too — that the atom is nothing but coagulated electricity. — [That] thought itself is composed of the same substance. Before the end of the fifth epoch of culture, science will have reached the stage where man will be able to penetrate into the atom itself. When the similarity of substance between the thought and the atom is once comprehended, the way to get hold of the forces contained in the atom will soon be discovered and then nothing will be inaccessible to certain methods of working.”

Rudolf Steiner

The Atom as Coagulated Electricity — December 23, 1904

... What this is fascinating idea is that you & I have thoughts which the dualists gave us science to call electrons & chemicals moving around in the low priced meat brain & hence all external material is made also of the same stuff - maybe it is a matter of focus that makes duality & not some philosophical invention of separateness, eh?



Seth says
obviously "whatever exists that is not me" cannot refer to anything that actually does completely define what to me is "out there now", because i obviously do exist ... "i think therefore i am" ... and I am part of what is "out there".   but for the purposes of defining "an objective world out there" i think we can ignore that minor complexity for the moment. 

Seth says
See also the epistemology of EST here

Seth says
ME 2013-12-19 09:00:21 16972
seth 2013-12-19 08:51:53 16972
obviously "whatever exists that is not me" cannot refer to anything that actually does completely define what to me is "out there now", because i obviously do exist ... "i think therefore i am" ... and I am part of what is "out there".   but for the purposes of defining "an objective world out there" i think we can ignore that minor complexity for the moment. 
Maybe you should just define what you are looking world as: [World minus Bozo]


...actually i think that is pretty much what i actually did ...

seth 2013-12-19 07:27:13 16972
i think there is a way to define "what there is out there" in a strictly logical sense.  it is whatever exists were *I* not to exist.   In a way it is what i have called "otherness".   It is that which i am not ... and have had no hand in creating, imagining, perceiving, or experiencing.  It is that which I do not know. 

Note that this is strictly an analytic definition. 

... so i am talking here just of experience ... that world without me, sans all my bozomdetry,  is just exactly what the objective world is to me.  as such that really factors out most of what people including RS have been dealing with in terms of electrons and chemicals and the fact that i am enmeshed in that and even whatever the spiritual world is and even if all this is a simulation.  this  thought trick makes no assumptions about all of that whatsoever.  it should just allow me to point to an aspect of my being, that presumably is also an aspect of your being and know that we are talking about the same thing ... notwistanding that appreantly we may have radically differeing assumptions about all that other stuff.  lol

Seth says
seth 2013-12-19 09:31:53 16972
ME 2013-12-19 09:00:21 16972
seth 2013-12-19 08:51:53 16972
obviously "whatever exists that is not me" cannot refer to anything that actually does completely define what to me is "out there now", because i obviously do exist ... "i think therefore i am" ... and I am part of what is "out there".   but for the purposes of defining "an objective world out there" i think we can ignore that minor complexity for the moment. 
Maybe you should just define what you are looking world as: [World minus Bozo]


...actually i think that is pretty much what i actually did ...

seth 2013-12-19 07:27:13 16972
i think there is a way to define "what there is out there" in a strictly logical sense.  it is whatever exists were *I* not to exist.   In a way it is what i have called "otherness".   It is that which i am not ... and have had no hand in creating, imagining, perceiving, or experiencing.  It is that which I do not know. 

Note that this is strictly an analytic definition. 

... so i am talking here just of experience ... that world without me, sans all my bozomdetry,  is just exactly what the objective world is to me.  as such that really factors out most of what people including RS have been dealing with in terms of electrons and chemicals and the fact that i am enmeshed in that and even whatever the spiritual world is and even if all this is a simulation.  this  thought trick makes no assumptions about all of that whatsoever.  it should just allow me to point to an aspect of my being, that presumably is also an aspect of your being and know that we are talking about the same thing ... notwistanding that appreantly we may have radically differeing assumptions about all that other stuff.  lol
Have you figured out how to access a world without Bozo?

Seth says
ME 2013-12-19 09:01:59 16972
ME 2013-12-19 09:00:21 16972
seth 2013-12-19 08:51:53 16972
obviously "whatever exists that is not me" cannot refer to anything that actually does completely define what to me is "out there now", because i obviously do exist ... "i think therefore i am" ... and I am part of what is "out there".   but for the purposes of defining "an objective world out there" i think we can ignore that minor complexity for the moment. 
Maybe you should just define what you are looking world as: [World minus Bozo]

An objective world context has an observer.

well yes of course .   we are almost right here on the nub of trying to talk about something precisely that cannot be talked about.  hence the necessity of my definitional trick: note the supposition in the definition ... were i not to exist, then what is left is what would be the objective world to me ... notwithstanding that i do exist.   it is a giant do-cy-do, but none the less the same thing applies to you as well ... does it not??

Seth says
ME 2013-12-19 09:34:38 16972
seth 2013-12-19 09:31:53 16972
ME 2013-12-19 09:00:21 16972
seth 2013-12-19 08:51:53 16972
obviously "whatever exists that is not me" cannot refer to anything that actually does completely define what to me is "out there now", because i obviously do exist ... "i think therefore i am" ... and I am part of what is "out there".   but for the purposes of defining "an objective world out there" i think we can ignore that minor complexity for the moment. 
Maybe you should just define what you are looking world as: [World minus Bozo]


...actually i think that is pretty much what i actually did ...

seth 2013-12-19 07:27:13 16972
i think there is a way to define "what there is out there" in a strictly logical sense.  it is whatever exists were *I* not to exist.   In a way it is what i have called "otherness".   It is that which i am not ... and have had no hand in creating, imagining, perceiving, or experiencing.  It is that which I do not know. 

Note that this is strictly an analytic definition. 

... so i am talking here just of experience ... that world without me, sans all my bozomdetry,  is just exactly what the objective world is to me.  as such that really factors out most of what people including RS have been dealing with in terms of electrons and chemicals and the fact that i am enmeshed in that and even whatever the spiritual world is and even if all this is a simulation.  this  thought trick makes no assumptions about all of that whatsoever.  it should just allow me to point to an aspect of my being, that presumably is also an aspect of your being and know that we are talking about the same thing ... notwistanding that appreantly we may have radically differeing assumptions about all that other stuff.  lol
Have you figured out how to access a world without Bozo?

no, but that is not necessary for me to refer to that world.

Seth says
Yeah I have to feed the dog & excise some berry bushes in front yard.

See Also

  1. Thought Where Bashar's single sequene stops working with 353 viewings related by tag "belief".
  2. Thought A finely tuned set of beliefs sensing a roll of tape with 167 viewings related by tag "belief".
  3. Thought Belief preceeding Perception with 119 viewings related by tag "belief".
  4. Thought Are you introducing a non-existant term? with 65 viewings related by tag "belief".
  5. Thought Hmmmmm..... with 26 viewings related by tag "belief".
  6. Thought How to use or misuse belief ... with 21 viewings related by tag "belief".
  7. Thought Belief is the Enemy of Knowledge with 18 viewings related by tag "belief".
  8. Thought A Test with 16 viewings related by tag "belief".
  9. Thought tag line with 8 viewings related by tag "belief".
  10. Thought edges with 2 viewings related by tag "belief".
  11. Thought Belief with 1 viewings related by tag "belief".
  12. Thought Beliefs with 0 viewings related by tag "belief".
  13. Thought Godel on Philosophy of Mathematics with 0 viewings related by tag "belief".
  14. Thought Relationship with 0 viewings related by tag "item 16968".
  15. Thought about: Individual meets collective - comment 58154 with 0 viewings related by tag "belief".
  16. Thought For those who like to Channel with 0 viewings related by tag "belief".
  17. Thought Atheism, Religion & Secularity with 0 viewings related by tag "belief".