Nothing. Greater or fewer minds do not change the characteristics of reality in any way. This is evidence for the independence of physical reality from minds (perceptions).
-
How do I proceed now that I have concluded what my existence is?
If others are not their minds then I must somehow deal with their bodies.
But dealing with bodies is not dealing with them as objects. This is not the objectification of people. This would be a grave mistake.
As a child I experienced myself as not understanding the difference between bodies and objects. That I can treat bodies like objects. I did not differentiate between the two kinds of materials. Eventually, I understood the difference.
A person’s ability to react to another’s actions is different to objects which do not react.
I react to other’s actions. I can only assume they have the same feelings and emotions as I do when I react. My experiences of feelings and emotions, and my assumption that others experiences are similar but not identical to mine is reasonable.
These experiences is how I navigate to sympathy and empathy.
-
My mind is tethered to the body. I have never had experienced my mind apart from my body. Not have observed minds apart from bodies. The only conclusion I can draw is that all that exists is material, and that I am my body.
-
I have observed 1) bodies with minds, 2) bodies without minds, 3) minds with bodies, but 4) never minds without bodies.
The evidence suggests that bodies are prime. Bodies exist without minds, even if it means in state of brain death, vegetative state, or death. Minds are instantiated as body processes. Minds, whatever they are, rely on the biological substrate. Without bodies, there are no minds (again, whatever minds are, if they are anything at all).
-
Matter is the only form of energy which hold consequences and therefore importance. Other forms of energy can be equated to properties of matter. All properties (processes (verbs and abstract nouns), qualities (adjectives and adverbs), and relations (function words) do not have existential status.
Ultimately, we are dealing with matter (objects) in the end, and not dealing with concepts directly, only dealing with matter that instantiate the properties of the matter as concepts.
-
Where do I find triangles in physical reality? I only find triangular things, but not triangles. Without objects, there is no concept of triangle.
-
Searle’s paper starts with a critique of Frege’s Sense and Reference. Searle argues that for Frege, a proper name includes a sense. Whereas, he is proposing that proper names do not have sense (meaning), only a reference.
The words he used is ostension and description. There is a difference for Searle between Hesperus/Phosphorus, and the Morning Star/Evening Star. The former is ostension (the name picks out objects but leaves out properties) and the latter description (picking out a kind by property). I agree with Searle here. Frege’s linking of name with property is incorrect. While the object may have properties that is not what proper names’ function.
-
I am at a loss as to what to call my theory that humans are not exempt from evolution, that their development is a natural course of evolution itself, and therefore our characteristic behavior of believing that we stand outside of evolution is an evolutionary mechanism. Everything we do, everything we think is a product of Darwinian evolution, and can be explained by Darwinism.
To call it pan-naturalism is to point out that human beings are part of the natural selection process. Pan-Darwinism (think The Descent of Man) is to highlight man is an animal.
-
Experience is, first and foremost, of objects, space and time. Space is inferred from the relationships of objects. Time is inferred from the change in the relationship of objects in space. Reality is the entirety of objects, space and time.
Nothing is known without experience.
Knowledge is from the sense faculties and the mental faculty.
Objects and entities are not the same. There are three kinds of entities: physical, mental and semantic entities. When one observes a rock, one creates a mental representation of it, and one may associate it with the semantic representation of the spoken or written word, symbol or image.
By objects I mean physical entities. To ignore physical entities has consequences. To ignore mental or semantic entities does not have consequences.
A rock thrown at you may harm you. The thought of a rock being thrown at you cannot harm you. The word expressed out loud will not directly harm you either. In short, only physical entities have ontological status, and knowledge is of all the entities.
-
Throughout human existence we have had direct perception (sensation) and inference (reason) as the basis of knowledge. These two routes to knowledge is all that is necessary. Everything else rely on these routes.
theoria 