Where to draw the line: how Platonism haunts our discourse and the search for exorcism

by slimboyfat 120 Replies latest jw friends

  • cofty
    cofty
    Scientific discourse is one way of describing the world but it isn't the only one

    That depends what aspect of the world you want to describe. There is a huge body of knowledge for which it is the only tool that matters.

    For example you suspect that rocks have consciousness. That is a scientific question.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    I would argue that there is no aspect of the world for which scientific discourse is "the only one the matters". Such a statement suggests a rather impoverished view of the world.

    What am I for example? It depends on your perspective.

    To a biologist I may be a mammal

    To a barber... needing a haircut

    To a psychiatrist... having a possible chemical imbalance

    To Asda... an unusual customer

    To a doctor... a hypochondriac

    To a Hindu... out of cosmic balance

    To a physicist... atoms

    To the JWs... a marked individual

    To my MP... a delightful constituent

    What am I really? Should one discourse be prioritised to the exclusion of others? If not for a human being, then why for the earth or for anything else?

  • coalize
    coalize
    I think that's not a question of perspective... Every being have multiple identities...
  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Yes, and the attempt to limit an object to a single discourse is to deprive it of multiple identities. "I know what the earth is, the earth is round and nothing else". From many perspectives the earth is not round. As you put it it has multiple identities, depending on the perspective of the viewer. The worm has a different view from the spaceman. Does the worm have consciousness would you say? Surely that's a philosophical and religious question as well as a scientific one.

  • coalize
    coalize

    No about the roundness of the earth, it's different than about an whole human being... There, it's exactly a question of perspective and projection.

    From the ground, you see the earth flat... But it's round anyway... From the athmosphere, you see the earth bigger than the sun, but it isn't

    Because at this moment you just stop at one of the properties of the earth, not at the whole earth!

  • cofty
    cofty
    Does the worm have consciousness would you say? Surely that's a philosophical and religious question as well as a scientific one.

    Nope, it's a scientific one as is your assertion that rocks have consciousness.

    From many perspectives the earth is not round

    The worm's perspective is flawed. Humans who can build aeroplanes and satellites can offer a far more accurate perspective regarding the shape, size and motion of the earth.

  • coalize
    coalize
    You are more than a guy needing an haircut... but you need that haircut anyway...
  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    On what basis do you claim the perspective of the spaceman or physicist is superior to the worm? It's like the doctor saying to the MP: "he's not a constituent he's a hypochondriac". And makes about as much sense. Cofty, theologians and philosophers talk a lot about consciousness I assure you. You are merely claiming that their talk is invalid, not that it doesn't exist. In fact theologians and philosophers have been discussing consciousness long before scientific discourse even arose. Consciousness is more than just brain activity.

  • coalize
    coalize
    On what basis do you claim the perspective of the spaceman or physicist is superior to the worm?

    Because of the definition of the word "perspective" perhaps?

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat
    What about the word claim? What about the monkey cosmonaut?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit