2009/8/26 Rex Allen <rexallen314.domain.name.hidden>:
>> It seems as though we can comprehend 'mind' only in terms of some
>> self-instantiating, self-interpreting context, in which meaning
>> depends always on the self-relating logic of differentiation and
>> interaction. Hence the 'perspective' of mind is always intrinsic,
>> and 'meaning' doesn't survive abstraction to any extremity of
>> 'external' observation. We can comprehend the 'externalised' flux -
>> i.e. what is abstractable out-of-context - as somehow correlative of
>> mind with mind, and mind with matter. But whatever meaning is finally
>> recoverable will again be 'as received' - i.e. as re-interpreted in
>> its context of arrival.
>
> This, for instance, seems to be a somewhat Kantian thought. I think.
> Based on my single week of reading about Kant's views.
Well, as I've said before, a lot of my thinking is stimulated by
reconsideration of a broadly eastern worldview, and many western
thinkers - Spinoza, Kant, Schopenhauer, Schrödinger and many others -
have also, explicitly or implicitly, articulated positions more or
less compatible with this. I've felt for a long time that this style
of thinking casts more light on mind-body issues than the Aristotelian
alternative, and most of the conventional criticism of this tends to
miss the point completely, IMO. You might have a look at my summary
of this in a recent response to Stathis in this thread. I wouldn't
expect all of it necessarily to be immediately transparent, but I'd be
happy to amplify where required.
David
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 8:00 PM, David Nyman<david.nyman.domain.name.hidden> wrote:
>>
>> It seems as though we can comprehend 'mind' only in terms of some
>> self-instantiating, self-interpreting context, in which meaning
>> depends always on the self-relating logic of differentiation and
>> interaction. Hence the 'perspective' of mind is always intrinsic,
>> and 'meaning' doesn't survive abstraction to any extremity of
>> 'external' observation. We can comprehend the 'externalised' flux -
>> i.e. what is abstractable out-of-context - as somehow correlative of
>> mind with mind, and mind with matter. But whatever meaning is finally
>> recoverable will again be 'as received' - i.e. as re-interpreted in
>> its context of arrival.
>
> This, for instance, seems to be a somewhat Kantian thought. I think.
> Based on my single week of reading about Kant's views.
>
> On the other hand, maybe when all you have is a hammer, everything
> looks like a nail...
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Thu Aug 27 2009 - 00:13:38 PDT