A new form of philosophy I came up with

[ALine]

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

If I know the taxonomy of a raven, do I really know anything about what it is like to be a raven? 

Why does it matter to know what the experience of a raven is? Knowing something experience does not give you knowledge about it, only giving you an awareness of its condition.

[geordief]

Can  we have thoughts that have  identical components  to ones we have had before?

Or do they just feel similar  but are in fact slightly different?

 

Eg: If I lose a physical object , suffer no material  consequences  and find it again by accident  is there a part of  the  feeling/thought process  that is identical in all circumstances ?

Is it possible that  there could  be fundamental thought processes  that we weave together to create our conscious awareness?

(Hope I have not wandered off topic?)

Edited December 31, 2024 by geordief

[ALine]

51 minutes ago, geordief said:

Can  we have thoughts that have  identical components  to ones we have had before?

Or do they just feel similar  but are in fact slightly different?

 

Eg: If I lose a physical object , suffer no material  consequences  and find it again by accident  is there a part of  the  feeling/thought process  that is identical in all circumstances ?

Is it possible that  there could be be fundamental thought processes  that we weave together to create our conscious awareness?

(Hope I have not wandered off topic?)

I think that's more deeper level analysis of understanding, whereas a more a surface level understanding needs to be developed first 

[geordief]

On 12/13/2024 at 11:18 PM, ALine said:

It states that a given object is a "thing" or system or concept which can interact with other systems

Is it your understanding that no two  such objects or systems can be identical?

What  might be a method  of quantifying similarities between them  if that was held to be useful?(so that ,for example we might agree to give the two objects a same name  /designation)

 

Edited December 31, 2024 by geordief

[ALine]

3 minutes ago, geordief said:

Is it your understanding that no two  such objects or systems can be identical?

They can be, these are patterns.

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, ALine said:

Knowing something experience does not give you knowledge about it, only giving you an awareness of its condition.

IOW, you don't get to know anything about it, you just get to know something about it.

[geordief]

5 minutes ago, ALine said:

They can be, these are patterns.

So 2 crows and a pigmy can be the same object as 2 pop divas and a  meringue tart?(did I understand "patterns" correctly?)

[ALine]

1 minute ago, geordief said:

So 2 crows and a pigmy can be the same object as 2 pop divas and a  meringue tart?(did I understand "patterns" correctly?)

Well no, each is an independent pattern.

[geordief]

4 minutes ago, ALine said:

Well no, each is an independent pattern.

Do you want to  give an example  of 2 identical patterns that can be designated  as one object (if that is what you were saying?)

Do they  have to be patterns of the same objects? (Like  identical waves perhaps?)

[dimreepr]

22 hours ago, iNow said:

As opposed to… what, exactly?

On 12/31/2024 at 12:56 PM, iNow said:

In many senses, humans are just wet meat machines, not truly different from what you’re dismissing due to poor philosophical capabilities. Most humans I know have poor philosophical capabilities too. 

The fundamental difference, I believe, is that we're analogue and digital has limitations when trying to mimic reality, it can only appoximate; like trying to compute a random...

 

22 hours ago, ALine said:

Why does it matter to know what the experience of a raven is? Knowing something experience does not give you knowledge about it, only giving you an awareness of its condition.

That basically means, you can't have a meaningful conversation with it... IOW my point... 🙄

[naitche]

On 12/16/2024 at 10:56 AM, ALine said:

 

I do not know anything in philosophy dealing with "negative" values. And I think events and actions and interactions can be empirical as well.

You could also think of the Objective as being a value  of reality, subtracted to its definition. When viewed in the Objective, its negative of Value. Any value it holds can only be in relationship ie contribution to...

[naitche]

The Objective is final. A defined totality with out further transaction.  Subtracted to a state of definition.

Value is transaction dependent. Contributing to states of definition that will depend on the Objectives served by transactions given.

The only Objective achievable when values contributing to it are not recognized equally is nil.

The Objective is Nothing, if value given is not recognized. Nothing to find with out being evidenced.

There are physical laws contained in the language of The objective and Subjective, expressed in Mathematics,  evidenced in biological/social processes and governing all of evolution.

Little  comprehension, or perhaps a cognitive dissonance,  without recognition of their correct use and application in language.

Edited January 30 by naitche

[dimreepr]

11 hours ago, naitche said:

The Objective is final. A defined totality with out further transaction.  Subtracted to a state of definition.

Value is transaction dependent. Contributing to states of definition that will depend on the Objectives served by transactions given.

The only Objective achievable when values contributing to it are not recognized equally is nil.

The Objective is Nothing, if value given is not recognized. Nothing to find with out being evidenced.

There are physical laws contained in the language of The objective and Subjective, expressed in Mathematics,  evidenced in biological/social processes and governing all of evolution.

Little  comprehension, or perhaps a cognitive dissonance,  without recognition of their correct use and application in language.

IOW a transaction is considered fair when both parties agree...

So, what's your point, as it relates to a new form of philosophy (the question asked)?

[naitche]

Its relevant because its a simplification of the idea proposed. There are mechanics implicit to existence demonstrated by our use of mathematics to explain it, and the language that recognizes the duality of The objective and subjective to it.

[dimreepr]

10 hours ago, naitche said:

Its relevant because its a simplification of the idea proposed. There are mechanics implicit to existence demonstrated by our use of mathematics to explain it, and the language that recognizes the duality of The objective and subjective to it.

Simplification is only useful, if the teacher deems it necessary to lead the child over a speed-bump in their undertsanding.

As I've explained, binary is not a useful method to explain reality...

[naitche]

Because you don't understand. Speed bump.

Binary is the basis.   Positive/Negative. 0/1.

Value given provides the Objective its totality or Summation.

The Objective is always negative, Any value is subjective. Value applied to the Objective can can only be expressed in the negative/is subtractive. Implicit in language biology and evolution, biological or otherwise.

[dimreepr]

11 hours ago, naitche said:

Because you don't understand. Speed bump.

Binary is the basis.   Positive/Negative. 0/1.

Value given provides the Objective its totality or Summation.

The Objective is always negative, Any value is subjective. Value applied to the Objective can can only be expressed in the negative/is subtractive. Implicit in language biology and evolution, biological or otherwise.

How does binary provide a random number??? 

It's a very complex process, with maths way above my paygrade, that doesn't work; I do it by shuting my eye's and spinning around a couple of time's, before I throw a dart at, something... 

 

Edited Sunday at 12:41 PM by dimreepr

[Genady]

35 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

How does binary provide a random number?

Binary is the basis.  Random/non-random. 0/1.

[dimreepr]

20 minutes ago, Genady said:

Binary is the basis.  Random/non-random. 0/1.

Ok, so how does a computer replicate that?

[Genady]

Just now, dimreepr said:

Ok, so how does a computer replicate that?

It does not. Computer works with pseudo-random. Which is non-random.

[dimreepr]

Just now, Genady said:

It does not. Computer works with pseudo-random. Which is non-random.

Indeed, which is my point...

[naitche]

On 2/3/2025 at 12:24 AM, dimreepr said:

Ok, so how does a computer replicate that?

 

On 2/3/2025 at 12:28 AM, dimreepr said:

 

 

On 2/3/2025 at 12:27 AM, Genady said:

It does not. Computer works with pseudo-random. Which is non-random.

Because a computer is not reality. Its a subjective part of it.. It  Its a tool fed its parameters of purpose - what its Register, or 'recognition' of value is to be to be. Its meaning, total value, and the abilities we build into it to find its meaning. The Objective mean sum total. based on 0/1, and the meaning we can find in each, relevant or in relationship to the to the purpose or objective given it, and how we have applied those in our favor, rather than to our detriment. Recognition- of what aspects or values are  inherent to our objective, or purpose. Which also requires recognition.

Objective or Subjective. Which aspect is relevant to its purpose, and which is at play in any expression it can provide in its being, or existence, on the values given.

0. The Objective, is always a subtraction of the reality expressed in 'recognition" of its meaning.

1. is Recognition, of a value given. It can't be either positive or  negative.It can't exist. There could be neither. Without being relative to Some thing.  Theres no  evidence for it relative to 'Nothing'.

We give the computer the values inherent to its task, purpose or Objective in defining or setting their limits. The meaning or being, and what we have provided to get there. The structure of existence we build.  Based on how well we recognize and make use of the aspects of existence we are given to work with is understood through its language.

O/1.

Objective or subjective .

Neither is of any value or consequence, Has no meaning or sum total,  without strict recognition of what its relevance is.

 

 

On 2/3/2025 at 12:28 AM, dimreepr said:

 

 

Edited 5 hours ago by naitche

[Genady]

3 hours ago, naitche said:

a computer is not reality

I think it is.

[dimreepr]

5 hours ago, naitche said:

Because a computer is not reality. Its a subjective part of it..

Well, a computer is an object which, unless subject to some sort of linguistically twisted reasoning, should be a clue.

 

 

5 hours ago, naitche said:

Objective or Subjective. Which aspect is relevant to its purpose, and which is at play in any expression it can provide in its being, or existence, on the values given.

0. The Objective, is always a subtraction of the reality expressed in 'recognition" of its meaning.

1. is Recognition, of a value given. It can't be either positive or  negative.It can't exist. There could be neither. Without being relative to Some thing.  Theres no  evidence for it relative to 'Nothing'.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but this is seems like utter bollox.

This for instance,"is Recognition, of a value given. It can't be either positive or  negative.It can't exist.", I've already explained how fair exchange for both parties (work's). the subjective bit, and the value is the objective bit, agreed by both parties.

Edited 38 minutes ago by dimreepr