OK. Tuesday's lecture may have been a little hard to grasp, but let me explain why.
You have to make a difference between "normal" questions, say, common sense questions and philosophical questions.
Most people aren't even interested in philosophical questions. Whether things exist or not is for many people a bizarre question.
Of course, my car exists. Drive in it every day to my work. What is the relevance of such a stupid question?
So far so good, but we get into problems when people claim that certain things exist and based on that have an impact on our own life.
Then you say....hold on! How do you know that X exists and thence I should obey certain rules, that you even put it into law, which makes me a criminal if I say....sorry, but X doesn't exist?
This is of course one of the hallmarks of any religious conviction. It is ok whatever people want to believe in, but should that be a basis for laws?
At least people like that have the obligation to proof, on what they base their beliefs are real. And then the philosopher kicks in and comes up with the question: what is real?
A question is wasted on believers because they simply define what they believe is real, period, so don't question them about that.
But that doesn't satisfy the philosopher. What you believe is certainly not a sufficient base for claiming the right to influence other people's life.
So, there is no other way. You have to have solid arguments based on what really exists, to claim, for instance that by law people should behave like this or that.
Here begins the thinking. Commoner or philosopher, both experience interaction with an environment. The idealist philosopher asks the question, what am I interacting with?
And then he concludes that it is all in his head. He is interacting with all his sensory experiences. OK, but here is the big question: where do these experiences come from, whaand t causes them?
A quote from Frank Visser's article "Why idealism is Bonkers" illustrates my point here nicely.
QUOTE - A realist looks at the moon and believes the moon is a real object, which will continue to exist even if he doesn't look at it.
And since we have been to the moon and back, I think he has a point. An idealist might say: the moon exists as the content of some consciousness.
It will disappear if nobody is looking at it. Or he might say: the only thing I am sure of are the sensations of seeing a moon.
This is all very incoherent, of course, because how can you have sensations of a moon if there isn't a moon in the first place? -END QUOTE-
We as living organisms, called homo sapiens, have consciousness. But in contrast to materialism, idealism asserts the primacy of consciousness as the origin and prerequisite of material phenomena.
According to this view, consciousness exists before and is the pre-condition of material existence, which leads to the following question: where does this consciousness come from?
Simple: we just have to rephrase this last statement. It should read: matter exists before and is the pre-condition of conscious existence.
How this makes me think of the famous statement of Jean-Paul Sartre in his interview "Existentialism is a humanism", where he said :
Existence precedes essence. What he meant was that you are condemned to physical existence and that only you can shape it by making choices,
which brings me back again more than 55 years ago. We had some kind of special "philosophical" day when I was in the 6th grade of the gymnasium. I don't recall the details,
but what I recall was, that there was this lady from the university of Leiden, who gave a lecture about Gabriel Marcel. a catholic existentialist.
And at the end, I asked her the question: if Sartre says existence precedes essence, how can a catholic then be an existentialist,
since according to that religion man is created according to god's essence? So for a catholic, essence precedes existence.
What her answer was, I don't remember, but I guess it was my first step to understanding reality, existence, and materialism.
Thank you all again for your attention....
MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition
TABLE OF CONTENT -----------------------------------------------------------------
1 - 100 Philosophers 9 May 2009 Start of
2 - 25+ Women Philosophers 10 May 2009 this blog
3 - 25 Adventures in Thinking 10 May 2009
4 - Modern Theories of Ethics 29 Oct 2009
5 - The Ideal State 24 Febr 2010 / 234
6 - The Mystery of the Brain 3 Sept 2010 / 266
7 - The Utopia of the Free Market 16 Febr 2012 / 383
8. - The Aftermath of Neo-liberalism 5 Sept 2012 / 413
9. - The Art Not to Be an Egoist 6 Nov 2012 / 426
10 - Non-Western Philosophy 29 May 2013 / 477
11 - Why Science is Right 2 Sept 2014 / 534
12 - A Philosopher looks at Atheism 1 Jan 2015 / 557
13 - EVIL, a philosophical investigation 17 Apr 2015 / 580
14 - Existentialism and Free Will 2 Sept 2015 / 586
15 - Spinoza 2 Sept 2016 / 615
16 - The Meaning of Life 13 Febr 2017 / 637
17 - In Search of my Self 6 Sept 2017 / 670
18 - The 20th Century Revisited 3 Apr 2018 / 706
19 - The Pessimist 11 Jan 2020 / 819
20 - The Optimist 9 Febr 2020 / 824
21 - Awakening from a Neoliberal Dream 8 Oct 2020 / 872
22 - A World Full of Patterns 1 Apr 2021 / 912
23 - The Concept of Freedom 8 Jan 2022 / 965
The Discussion
[13:15] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): Thank you Herman
[13:15] herman Bergson: At least one survivor :-))
[13:16] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hehe
[13:16] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): I am having a hard time with this whole concept
[13:16] herman Bergson: which concept, gemma?
[13:16] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): it is not what I expected to hear about materialism
[13:16] oola Neruda: could you elaborate on your last sentence...
[13:16] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): Its a special concept for sure.
[13:16] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): from looking at the wiki about materialism
[13:16] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): and what said
[13:17] herman Bergson: ahh..
[13:17] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): very different
[13:17] oola Neruda: reality, existence and materialism.... could you elaborate please
[13:18] herman Bergson: yes oola...:-)
[13:18] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): back to the very basic ... right oola
[13:18] herman Bergson: Just one moment...
[13:18] herman Bergson: Wiki says: Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds matter to be the fundamental substance in nature, and all things, including mental states and consciousness, are results of material interactions.
[13:18] herman Bergson: and that is a more compex way of saying what I say :-))
[13:19] herman Bergson: That is...we haven't yet started to dig into materialism as such
[13:20] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): thinks right
[13:20] herman Bergson: ok...let me answer oola...
[13:20] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): good
[13:21] herman Bergson: When I was 18 I was reading Sartre...and learned about his statement that existence precedes essence....that is...precedes the person you are...
[13:21] herman Bergson: you become who you are by the choices you make in life...
[13:22] herman Bergson: that means, that matter precedes consciousness...
[13:22] herman Bergson: which leads to the conclusion that this only is possible if you assume a materialist ontology
[13:23] herman Bergson: I hope this answers your question, oola?
[13:24] oola Neruda: sort of... but i think there must be more to learn about this.... it seems like water... you can tell it is wet but do you really understand it
[13:24] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ah
[13:24] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): much more
[13:24] herman Bergson: Ahhh..that makes me think of that famous analysis of John Searle of consciousness.....
[13:25] oola Neruda: ??
[13:25] herman Bergson: He once said....look here I have a glass of water....
[13:25] herman Bergson: when I put my finger in it and take it out again, my finger feels wet
[13:26] herman Bergson: but when I analyse the content of this glass I only find molecules
[13:27] herman Bergson: But I don't find wetness....yet my finger is really wet
[13:28] herman Bergson: That is the relation between matter and consciousness...
[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ok that helps
[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): wetness is a property of those molecules
[13:29] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): how they behave together as a liquid
[13:29] herman Bergson: you can dissect and analyse the brain to the atom....but there is nothing that is consciousness in that matter to find
[13:29] herman Bergson: yet there is a brain...and here we are equiped with it and say..Hello..here I am
[13:30] oola Neruda: listens
[13:31] herman Bergson: The error of idealism is that they give primacy to consciousness
[13:31] herman Bergson: they forget to explain what the origin of this consciousness is
[13:31] herman Bergson: on the other hand
[13:31] herman Bergson: the materialist says, the brain generates consciousness
[13:32] herman Bergson: however...we haven't the slightest idea how the brain does this, nor what consciousness is in relation to a material brain
[13:32] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): could it be that consciousness is the energy of the universe?
[13:32] herman Bergson: But what we know for certain.....no brain..no consciousness
[13:33] herman Bergson: That is an idealist conclusion Beertje
[13:33] bergfrau Apfelbaum: papa Moon
[13:33] herman Bergson: it still doesn't explain what consciousness is or where it came from
[13:33] bergfrau Apfelbaum: :-)
[13:33] oola Neruda: and how does one know if they are being "correct" in their conclusions
[13:34] oola Neruda: if you have to rely on ... consciousness
[13:34] herman Bergson: Well...we have a big load of scientific knowledge for instance oola
[13:35] oola Neruda: even that can be mistaken or outright wrong
[13:35] oola Neruda: because of the brain doing the thinking
[13:35] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:35] herman Bergson: ok...deny gravity and jump from a skyscraper :-)
[13:35] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): again becomes a matter of belief i think
[13:36] oola Neruda: yes.... i think belief is a major factor here
[13:36] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): interesting
[13:36] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i agree
[13:36] herman Bergson: whether you are halfway up or halfway down, Gemma?
[13:36] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): not goingt to test
[13:36] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hehe
[13:36] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): will believe i will not be able to find the answer when i land
[13:36] herman Bergson: wise decision :-))
[13:36] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): so wont try it
[13:37] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): In a game engine i can program gravity as i want but in RL i know result will always be SPLAT!
[13:37] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): unless i have a parachute
[13:37] herman Bergson: Well..interesting contrast Bejiita....
[13:38] herman Bergson: so...we cannot bend everything in what we call reality
[13:38] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): gravity RL is always around -9.82
[13:38] herman Bergson: No cheating allowed here Bejiita ^_^
[13:38] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): wich is what the unit Newton is based on
[13:38] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): 9.81, 9,82 somewhere around there
[13:38] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeed Herman
[13:39] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i cant code reality
[13:39] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and make u fly rl
[13:39] herman Bergson: MAkes me feel alot better, Bejiita...won't test it however ^_^
[13:39] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): can be dangerous
[13:39] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): so i will let my consciousness decide
[13:39] herman Bergson: What you should keep in mind it the following.....
[13:40] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and even if i could id not do it today, im a bit tired from all TURF yesterday and i made a real drunk bug before now, now corerected
[13:40] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): u always need focus
[13:40] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
[13:40] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
[13:40] Nasty Calamity is online.
[13:40] herman Bergson: homo sapiens is inclined to assume certain things, of which he can not prove that they exist.
[13:41] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): very true
[13:41] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): bigfoot
[13:41] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): some do believe
[13:41] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hehee
[13:41] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): flat earth
[13:41] herman Bergson: on the other hand there are members of the species homo sapiens that say..f#ck off with that nonsense.....
[13:41] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i can create a cool bigfoot in UE5 maybe
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hehe
[13:42] herman Bergson: don't try to control MY life with your fantasies
[13:42] oola Neruda: there are many possible answers to some questions...some real...some not.... is it not right to question whether you have the right answer... or how to decide it if is
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i think we continue to do that all the time oola
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): all the time
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:42] oola Neruda: aren't we wading into things from a blind spot
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): always
[13:43] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): I think
[13:43] herman Bergson: what do you mean with "is it not right to question whether you have the right answer" oola
[13:43] herman Bergson: I think it is a basic human right to question answers
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): yes
[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): agree
[13:44] herman Bergson: that is the meaning of social interaction
[13:44] oola Neruda: seems like we are acting like god when we just make decisions...even with evidence ... perhaps excellent evidence... it could still be wrong
[13:45] herman Bergson: I don't get it....
[13:45] Lecturehall: 2022-09-08 [22:45] Beertje Beaumont
[13:45] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): i have to go, there is a thunderstorm
[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ohoh
[13:45] herman Bergson: Just by questioning the answers everyone gives we can live together
[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): aaa ok, cu Beertje
[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): take care
[13:45] oola Neruda: be well, Beertje
[13:45] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont) is offline.
[13:46] herman Bergson: That is the basis of every political debate for instance
[13:46] herman Bergson: you say this he says that what are the arguments , the justifications?
[[13:48] herman Bergson: Not a single scientific theory is complete or the ultimate answer....
[13:48] herman Bergson: Even Einstein may be right, but yet not 100% it seems
[13:49] herman Bergson: Like Newton was right to some extend
[13:49] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): and all the philosophers
[13:49] oola Neruda: and are our brains really enough... are we being deceived or just not experienced enough to find those answers
[13:49] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah yes
[13:49] herman Bergson: Philosophers don't want to be right.....
[13:49] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): no they are not oola
[13:49] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): brains deceive too
[13:49] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): minds
[13:49] herman Bergson: they just want to ask the right questions all the time to people who say that they are right
[13:50] oola Neruda: we need to be able to trust our senses.... but... is that really true?
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): Are we living in the matrix after all where gravity CAN be turned upside down if we just find the APIs and algorithms
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i doubt that though
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but
[13:50] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ha
[13:50] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeed nothing is 100% certain
[13:50] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): almost makes sense bejita
[13:51] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): we are living by algorithms these days
[13:51] herman Bergson: Yes oola....we have to trust our senses and have to know the limitations of these "instruments"
[13:51] herman Bergson: that is how we communicate with our environment
[13:51] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): (Goes inside Unreal 5 and tries to find a way to flip gravity RL, nope not working!)
[13:51] herman Bergson: what else do we have but our senses?
[13:52] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): which is lucky or everything in this room would crash into the ceiling
[13:52] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): along with all my poor neighbours
[13:52] oola Neruda: being able to analyze.... which seems like more than just the senses
[13:52] herman Bergson: ahh...we'll get to that in the next lecture , oola:-)
[13:53] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): our senses are indeed like an interface between the brain and reality
[13:53] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ok
[13:53] herman Bergson: that point of view
[13:53] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): hopes so
[13:53] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): hope to make it tuesday
[13:53] herman Bergson: And that idea is more than 2500 years old already, oola :-)
[13:53] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and as i say before, 2 properties, sound and color dont actually exist, vibrations are converted to sound and a portion of the EM spectrum is converted to light
[13:54] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): so in reality everything is dark around us, our brain creates the light and colors
[13:54] herman Bergson: Ok Gemma, I'll keep my figers crossed for you ^_^
[13:54] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:54] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): thats a thing i can say with some certanity
[13:55] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hugs Gemma
[13:55] herman Bergson: ok...thank you all again...
[13:55] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:55] herman Bergson: and enjoy your weekend :-))
[13:55] herman Bergson: Class dismissed...
[13:55] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): going back to London city
[13:55] bergfrau Apfelbaum: thank you Herman and class!
[13:55] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): oki
[13:55] bergfrau Apfelbaum: yay
[13:55] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:55] oola Neruda: that water analogy you began with is really excellent
[13:55] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): aaa that one works
[13:55] herman Bergson: John Searle's
[13:56] herman Bergson: A brilliant metaphor indeed
[13:56] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
No comments:
Post a Comment