deeds are experiences and experiences are events

events happen with or without my awareness of them.
#1 i assume on faith without proof
i am quite certain of #1
...
things that i experience are also events ... "experiences are events"
all events that i experience happen with my awareness of them
#6 is by definition - it is an analytic truth
#6 is an over simplification because awareness is not a binary distinction - there is after the vast subconscious which i believe was discovered by Freud
#6 is a over simplification because "I" am not a binary distinction either
...
some events I instigate ... in other words I cause those events to happen by my actions
i call those events that i instigate my "deeds" ... they are what i "do"
I experience those deeds ... "deeds are experiences"
...
nothing in #1-14 ~should~ be new to anyone nor ~should~ it be controversial
#1-14 has been invoked here merely to provide a framework and context for what follows which might be new or controversial
...
when i read or write or hear (or do) about some thingey in language or other media i frequently experience events about how the media matches the thingey.
if the media matches the thingey, i call the experience about the match a "experience of truth".
...
now here is where it gets a little bit complicated
...
bullets beyond this point are recorded here for my reference only - i doubt they are expressed accurately enough for anybody else to understand ... i will clarify them later as inspiration arises ... so perhaps you should stop reading at this point
The Will to Believe, William James ?
action changes experience
... that even applies to deeds themselves
my experience of truth matches are things that i do
they are, strangely enough, my deeds
hence the will to believe ... feeds back on itself (#18) ... and can confuse the experience of truth itself
#2 is an example of #31
personally i see no reason to consider a feeling of truth that happens as a consequence of my own doing as a second class experience in relation to those truth experiences which i have not part in instigating.
rather the opposite ... those truths are of the finest which i can ever experience

Comments

Seth says

strangely enough this train of thought occured to me while i was considering how to respond to ...

M1g0r 2014-02-05 12:00:45 17064

l, your snarkiness does not encourage any further participation on my part.

the blue bolded part could be anything & everything
we started out with your truth & my truth probably not shareable
did that shift?
even if shared via language you can't get everyone everywhere to buy into it
I hold truth similar to proof - i.e. demonstration (see BC)
still some agreement as to the a priori assumptions has to show up (axioms in mathematics)
agreement is not truth - see current politics
there will come a time down this road where I loose interest in you view of truth

I have one that works for me
We can still converse on other subjects as long as their truthyness is irrelevant
I suggest you begin to bump the ideas here against someone else

... especially the bolded part.

now i probably can't remember how my consideration of a response to that elicited the evolution of the train above. but it had something to do with me potentially saying ...

source: what i could have said
Well you will stop responding to my thoughts just when you actually do. You know that, and i know that you know, and you know that i know that you know ...

since telling me something that you already know that i know, can not be to inform me of what you know that i already know ... what were you intending to tell me?

... but like i said, this may or may not be related to the train of thought above at all

Seth says

M1g0r 2014-02-07 00:12:14 17068

seth 2014-02-06 13:25:00 17068

incidentally i have responses to all of your bullets of 2014-02-05 12:00:45 above and can respond to each of them interlinear. but i see no reason to do it unless you want me to. Do you want me to?

No. The conversation soars off in the realm of philosophy & impractical directions. Thanks though it was fun for a while. I imagine it to be going on long after the World ends at some table somewhere - an old wallaby of mine.

Fine, i rather expected that. I'm sure that does expresses your view of philosophy ... it does not express mine. Being aware of my perdicament and constructing my awareness of how it works such that it feels right is what i do.

Seth says

source: mark
Something here reminds me of a cartoon

well yest certainly

.

#23-34 in my bullets deals with that ... of course you didn't read those because i suggested that you should not

.

But there is a giant feedback loop between what we do
and what we perceive, cognize and conceive.

Sometimes i think i experience events ... yet that makes me passive, an object blowing in the wind of those events. Yet it is not really like that. I reach ... i grasp ... i construct mental tools and attitudes ... those are my actions ... and my perceptions and cognitions and inventions are just as very much dependant on those reaches and those mental constructions and those attitudes as the otherness is in impinging on me. Study how babies learn, there is a whole lot of that in cogsci.

deeds are experiences and experiences are events

Tags

Comments

See Also