Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
07-08-2003, 02:10 PM | #131 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Yes introspection ‘feels’ private and I personally trust that feeling to some extent. Although of course Wittgenstein’s response that a private language has no meaning and therefore pure introspection is impossible carries weight. Even introspection is culturally specific.
There is no escape from culture while we are alive and able to communicate……. even with ourselves. But that does not mean we are entirely our culture, any more than we are entirely physical, spiritual, or whatever. Its no real problem as long as one does not look to an extremist authority to enable one to relate to the world. |
07-08-2003, 02:39 PM | #132 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: US
Posts: 5,495
|
Quote:
Cheers, John |
|
07-08-2003, 03:03 PM | #133 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Of course if you believe that a private language has meaning then introspection using it can reach truths beyond your cultural reference. Personally I don’t think a private language has any major relevance to me or anyone I have ever met, except in chance misinterpretations.of the one we inherit. But of course it isn’t just language. Learning French in addition to English won’t necessarily change your world view that much, because both reside in capitalist democracy and historical representations aren’t that different. Having said that the French significantly embraced postmodernism before the USA did, which is ironic.
Private thoughts using our culturally inherited language is good enough for me. Our culture is hardly static. "Irrespective of how one defines introspective mind/brain activity, that activity has purpose and meaning analyzing the information provided to it." Well I have to disagree there. Past understandings of being human didn’t even have the concept of brain let alone analysis. The only way that statement could be true is if you believe the truth about mind brain is not culturally specific. As I said I think truth necessarily is. |
07-08-2003, 03:18 PM | #134 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southwest USA
Posts: 4,093
|
Quote:
If we are not going to accept "private language", then we must accept some authority when it comes to defining language. I believe Webster's New Collegiate could be considered as just such an authority. If that is so then I would say that by definition truth does not meet the standard of being absolute. |
|
07-08-2003, 03:41 PM | #135 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,199
|
Quote:
The western world had given up on human sacrifice by the time it encountered the Aztecs. Did their making contact with them somehow confer immorality on the practice? If so, it appears the practice was perfectly moral until independent observers saw it as immoral. You OK with that? Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
07-08-2003, 03:45 PM | #136 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: US
Posts: 5,495
|
Quote:
In turn, this would present scenarios where a) mind/brain activity is culturally specific because even though our brain structures are similar their informational content comes from nurture and b) brain structure is plastic - evidence studies of musician's brains etc. - depending on stimuli, so there may be a Bell Curve typs case for enhanced cultural functionality etc. Imaging - a specific set of neurons for Morris dancing!! Cheers, John |
|
07-08-2003, 03:49 PM | #137 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: US
Posts: 5,495
|
Quote:
|
|
07-08-2003, 04:06 PM | #138 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
"You're missing the point. I'm saying that the very same logic by which you assert that human sacrifice was moral to the Aztecs leads to the conclusion that the gassing of Jews was moral to the Nazis."
yes of course......... and neither is moral within the capitalist democrat cultural context. But i repeat that i think many nazi's were liars. Some were duped. You cannot judge either absolutely, but only within the relativity of your own cultural context. Thus a fleeing nazi who convinces you that they were duped presents a difficulty within some cultural contexts. Grey areas abound. There are no absolutes. "But at some point, any German with half a brain would have figured out (as obviously many did who got out while the getting was good) that Hitler was a power-mad tyrant even if they didn't know about the camps. " well that's easier said than lived. Political authority isn't something that we can all ignore with the same intellectual equinamity, because not everyone chooses or is capable of making rationality their ultimate authority. Hitler twisted Christianity into anti-semitism for a start. National identity too. He was also a prolific performer with great presense. Presumably you wouldn't dismiss politics, religion, patriotism and talent all as half brained culture? |
07-08-2003, 04:26 PM | #139 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
"Imaging - a specific set of neurons for Morris dancing!!"
Lol Well yeh if you want to and maybe its useful too! But such a perspective on the truth feels to me to be very close to the scientific one, where truth is seen as not culturally specific, but superior to it. Eg the law of conservation of energy is seen by many as a truth independent of whether a living creature is aware of it. Similarly for the new laws of conservation of information. That whole philosophical standpoint is simply placing scientific measurement as the only true authority for deciding truth. In doing so it tries to use the trick that truth is independent of culture on the basis that its predictions of the physical universe, such as eclipses, would happen to any culture that existed at the time. It is merging ‘the truth’ with existence. (or reality) But although an eclipse can be seen as reality, how it is seen as a truth remains culturally specific. Scientifically, religiously, commercially or otherwise. |
07-08-2003, 04:32 PM | #140 | ||||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,199
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|