(offlist) RE: What We Can Know About the World (fwd)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brent Meeker [mailto:meekerdb.domain.name.hidden]
> Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 12:29 AM
> To: Lee Corbin
> Subject: Re: What We Can Know About the World
>
>
> On 29-Jul-05, you wrote:
>
> > Jesse writes
> >
> >>> I meant that your perceptions have physiological causes
> >>> because your brain is a part of an obviously successful
> >>> survival machine designed by evolution.
> >>
> >> Sure, but all of this is compatible with an idealist philosophy where
> >> reality is made up of nothing but observer-moments at the most
> >> fundamental level--something like the "naturalistic panpsychism"
> >> discussed on that webpage I mentioned.
> >
> > The disagreement I have with what you have written
> > is that I do *not* see observer-moments as the most
> > fundamental entities.
>
> There are two distinct kinds of "fundamental". OMs may be
epistemologically
> fundamental, but not ontologically fundamental. Starting with what we
> think we know, we develop a model of reality which goes beyond what we
> directly experience. It's the best explanation of our experience that
> there is a reality not dependent on our thoughts.
>
>
> >It's just so much *clearer*
> > to me to see them arising only after 13.7 billion
> > years or so (locally) and that they obtain *only* as
> > a result of physical processes.
>
> That seems to be the most parsimonious explanation.
>
>
>
> Brent Meeker
Received on Sun Jul 31 2005 - 00:10:30 PDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:10 PST