There is only one world, one reality. Paradigms which frame the world as being divided into separate and plural worlds are doing so needlessly.
Category: philosophy
-
Early in life I became aware of something that I would now know philosophers call the internal and external worlds. It goes something like this:
The external world is a place where things happen beyond my control. Things are somewhat acting independently to each other. The internal world is different to the external world. The thoughts of the internal is different to the actions of the external world. They seem to separate worlds. My body interface to the external world is public. No one knows of my private thoughts of the internal world. These two worlds, the public and the private, never meet.
To me, this paradigm is problematic. It suggests that there is not one but two worlds. It also suggests that these worlds are unbridgeable and hence separate.
-
The obsession of downloading a mind from one body and uploading it to another surely is the clearest indication that the mind is conceived as an embodied “thing”. That we do not want to just let the mind float about without a body must mean we understand all too clearly that a mind requires a body.
-
No body, no mind. A body does not require a mind, but a mind requires a body.
-
There exists a physical or material reality and only a physical or material reality. All other philosophical questions are derived from this one proposition.
-
This is not a new approach. Identity theorists, eliminativists, physicalists, materialists, realists are all versions of a philosophy that argues that the world is not dependent on the mind.
-
I don’t believe in direct knowledge. All knowledge, internal, external or otherwise is indirect knowledge. Knowledge is a process of a thing. Processes do not “exist” independent of a thing. Processes are reified by the process of language. Something always has to perform the process. The process itself and the process of verbalizing the process are performed by something. The process of gaining and holding knowledge is performed by something.
-
I have not always been a materialist. I used to think a lot about abstract objects to the point of being obsessed of them, ignoring The material world all together.
In some ways I was like hardcore idealists, thinking the material was a creation of the mind. The mind/spirit was more important than the physical self and world.
This ways of thinking did not get me very far. I was confused and frustrated with my relationship to the world. which perhaps why I chose to change my way of thinking, to abandon privileging the mind and spirit. Because every time I try to function with mind and spirit in priority I ended up failing, or dissatisfied with the outcome.
To cut to the chase, by dealing with this body in this world it took care of the mind and spirit. I was not neglecting them but they were better for this flipping of properties. The world became more manageable. My mind and spirit then also became more manageable as well.
This transformation was not overnight but gradual, and it took many years of trial and error until reaching where I am now. And even then I am still not fully whereI want to be but much closer and also heading in the right direction. Prioritizing the mind, spirit and abstract objects had literally felt like being led in the complete opposite direction far from where I had wanted to be.
Where I want to be is not a physical or material place but I can’t reach there without prioritizing the physical over the ideal. This much I know.
-
I do not believe there is narrow content. All content is contextually based. All utterances of non-contextually based content is done so in the context of the utterance. Such content is still contextually based. Context-free utterances are an impossibility.
theoria 