A Wholistic Duality

fadingCaptain said:
ok wes, i see more clearly your point now. it is hard for me to wrap my head around because that is simply not how i think (knowledge to me is a range of probabilities, not possibilities). There may be instances where i have collapsed my perspective though.
Click to expand...

What do you mean "knowledge is a range of probabilities"? What is the probability this sentence has been typed?

I think you are probably dead on in respect to religious conviction.
Click to expand...

I think it spans all mutually exclusive or polar concept sets... which makes me wonder about the philosophical retooling of language. Where sets are referred to by the set and orientation rather than straight to an extreme as if it exists in a vacuum. War for instance, is part of a cycle. It doesn't just happen because of evil, but rather is part of a cycle of diverging value. I think the notion of war is easily bastardized into lesser comprehension of the topic when it's mentioned outside of its true context. I just bring it up as an example, don't mean to get into the topic itself... but I think there are a ton of shits like that.

Then again, I suppose language itself is utilitarian and perhaps should not be forcibly manuplated to attempt unwarranted advances in common comprehension... hmm... well there's actually a long topic there and screw that for now.
 
Wes,
Take your circle example from earlier. One side yes, the other no. In your example there is a (x)% probability of 'yes' being correct and (x)% probability of 'no' being correct. You cannot pick one side and say its 100%. 100% percent is the whole circle! Follow me? Therefore, you cannot collapse one set. Whether people wish to acknowledge this is up to them.

The problem is people do not see knowledge in this regard. It is not a reflection of reality but of our inate inability to directly experience reality. We can never know an objective truth.

"What is the probability this sentence has been typed?" >99%
 
fadingCaptain said:
Wes,
Take your circle example from earlier. One side yes, the other no. In your example there is a (x)% probability of 'yes' being correct and (x)% probability of 'no' being correct.
Click to expand...

Hmm... "being correct" is not relevant to my example, except in terms of how one sees things. Whether or not you are correct in terms of "reality" is irrelevant to the topic at hand IMO... as reality does what it does regardless of your correctness.

You cannot pick one side and say its 100%. 100% percent is the whole circle!
Click to expand...

Ah, yeah I see where you're going with it... but that changes the example distinctly. Instead of the line being in the middle, you're scooting it around based on how much of one or the other you're embracing. I kind of like that, but I don't know if it serves the point I was after. I can see how it could work for a lot of things. Actually reviewing, I think it does work here, as that's kind of the deal, human psychology evaluated at a given time does allow for the circle to be fully encompassed. It allows for the other perspective to dissappear completely from reference.

Follow me? Therefore, you cannot collapse one set.
Click to expand...

I think I do follow, but don't understand why you'd think you can't collapse a set. Okay, I see what you mean, but I think you can indeed and it happens all the time - mostly for practicality. I think for instance, the probability that I typed this is 100%. If I didn't, I'm freakin insane by my own standards and thus my approximation is stupid to begin with.

"What is the probability this sentence has been typed?" >99%
Click to expand...

I'll stick with the 100, as the other possibilities are irrelevant to my survival function at this time. If however, evidence is presented to suggest otherwise, I'll re-evaluate at the time.
 
fadingCaptain said:
when a magician performs a magic trick, the illusion itself is as real as the deck of cards he handles. however it appears to be something it is not. it is in this sense i see consciousness as an illusion. it is very real but not what it seems.

more to topic:
ok wes, i see more clearly your point now. it is hard for me to wrap my head around because that is simply not how i think (knowledge to me is a range of probabilities, not possibilities). There may be instances where i have collapsed my perspective though. I think you are probably dead on in respect to religious conviction.
Click to expand...
This appears only to be the case if one accepts conventional thought about hwo our minds work. It is worth noting that maybe the conventional ideas about mind functioning may be very incorrect thus when the truth is revealed we find the use of the word illusion is not longer valid.

For example:
In another thread about objectivity the main arguement about it's non-existance is premised on our current understanding of how we sense and what we interpret from what we sense. The "how" in this question when answered using conventional thought renders reality subjective, however if the "how" is answered differently it can be seen that reality is mainly objective yet subject to interpretations that are more the process of "intellectualising" rather than "being"

Whilst I do not have the answers needed I hold great doubts that reality is as illusion-istic or as subjective as conventional thought would lead us to believe.
 
Wes,
"I'll stick with the 100, as the other possibilities are irrelevant to my survival function at this time."
I think we are pretty much in agreement with what we are saying. We both agree in your wholistic duality just see different viewpoints of it. Perhaps another example would illustrate my point better. The important questions and realms of knowledge are not things like whether this sentence was written. "Is dark energy a property of the universe?" will get a much greater variance in probabilities per individual. Someone contemplating such a question is forced to weigh evidence and probabilities. There is no black and white obviousness. Such reveals the true nature of knowledge.

QQ,
"Whilst I do not have the answers needed I hold great doubts that reality is as illusion-istic or as subjective as conventional thought would lead us to believe. "
I agree about reality but what about consciousness? I find it hard to imagine a scenario in which consciousness is revealed as something other than a grand illusion. Consciousness is such a difficult subject however I could be completely wrong.
 
wesmorris said:
What do you mean "knowledge is a range of probabilities"? What is the probability this sentence has been typed?
Click to expand...
Depends on your perspective.
From the present, the probability is 1. From the beginning of time it's around 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.......................................................................................................1 :D
 
Huuum... I can see outline of figures from connecting some of those 0s together... :D
Must be an illusion... or is it reality? :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top