Brooke Shields Fan Family

Forum for Brooke Shields Fans
 
HomeHome  PortalPortal  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 Philosophers

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
AuthorMessage
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:45 am

It's so Very Delightful. The asertoric ideas on each point are not as much as the systematicity I'm founding for the whole essay.
It's just Shocked bounce wave cheers
Coming for little while is a calmie pill of rest, a blessing break from the process of the workingmindofminelol.
Good.
Yesterday at the Café, some Nice People. There was a moment when five Ladies passed around me, going to the exit I guess, all focused in their walking direction less or more, excepting one who said, looking those ways "like not and just around but..." ( geek Exclamation Laughing Razz ): "I'd take a good gin-Tonic today here now"...
I know I've used to be quite "paranoid" (but this in Liking terms! geek Laughing Embarassed ) about these things, but there was no doubt on second intentions. I mean, not for "going further" but for some geek Smile
Nice. Human.
I was sitting with my orange, and this happened maybe because I had not put my books and papers on the table yet. Yes, because in that case, I just think the walk would have become a running, and the glances tongue smiley would have got like some "this is a little wave , tongue "
geek Laughing Smile (Loving this fun on me now); or maybe just not. This we'll never know.
Other things, at the very least by my essay (sorry for some heavy exhausting emos, but it's a moment valve now from intellectual- geek Laughing lol! ) , we will know for sure.
Well, back to task.
Blessings.
Very Good Hugs of Loving Forever Beautifully True!!
flower cheers hasi tongue smiley love smiley tongue smiley hasi cheers flower

ps: and funny cute!!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Fri Jun 03, 2016 3:32 pm

Hi Good timing!!
cheers Razz flower Razz cheers

Sweet going.
Had to go for little while.
Very Good day for the Task. Respected my brain and, however, results are really valuable. I've got, little material time for doing it, both chapters written little lines on paper, scheme structure. Not easy but able in two months, not for running proud but just for realistic calculations, remembering many time I've been thinking so hard and also the thesis coming.
Well enough for today morning, now meal.
Loving and Adoring so, You're Perfect to me, Heavenly Adored of my Heart!! action smiley cheekey smiley tongue smiley
flower cheers love smiley cheers flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Mon Jun 06, 2016 1:27 pm

Oh, Forum, that's a Calming thing to "say", express.
Tremendous Princeton's Professor John Forbes Nash jr., if Movie tells the Story the same as it Happened, was visited for getting sure he could go to the cerimony and all related to it.
My achievements are at good level and my brain too.
NEVER esquizofrenia (sounds or visions; well I talked about some paranormal events that happened once at my Family Home, but it was something shared by most of members of the Family, then: or it happened, or it was a case of "collective suggestion"; but in any case a case of esquizoid behaviour) and ALWAYS head on its place... Excepting in the Forum!!!!!!!! As Hugh Grant Sister when Meeting Julia Roberts, Emma Chambers, for the first time Shocked affraid Laughing Razz
Going Fine, I'm wave bounce party smiley for the Sense I'm Developing.
And, please remember: "guapo esglaiat", "I'm so happy for have been able to meet myself", "candid chilidish" and "terminator glasses"! geek Laughing Razz
Now I changed the order, 2nd/third, it's OK, I only do it inconcious terms (well, usually, I'm making mistakes at it too as anybody) in the case of numbers, not words (probably for this me liking philo and physics more than formal logics and mathematics, though I can understand well both; in fact it's Key for All!).
See and see later, Loving!!
flower cheers love smiley cheers flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Tue Jun 07, 2016 7:34 pm

Just for adding I also Adore Bach and that I am taking "con filosofía" the philosophy (taking philosophy by philosophy, possibly?).
this last thing does mean I am following my own thoughts: taking easy, this way going much further, by higher vision.
Each little step can be an ecstasy, like Santa Teresa de Jesús by istance, through a inner stream of natural Budhist calm of heart and mind; and by both things reaching the Soul.
flower love smiley flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Thu Jun 09, 2016 12:48 pm

I cant listen to Music today on the computer, because connector points are differently sized, and my usual "cascos" (what the... is the english name for it that now I can't remember! Mad Laughing Smile ).
But Watching some Video on silence, just images and letters, I think was Good to me, Felt Well.
Though, I also see many Images I am not seeing (not necessary the same day, but after a couple of weeks...; talking about magazines, interviews...; and some more time, the necessary, for Movies; would be Nice) periodically as new.
It's OK.
Excesses on the distance are not a calming pill, exactly geek Laughing Smile
Actually, I think I missunderstood both of us, You and Me. Not only "eggs, nuts...", but also real brigthness.
I Subestimated the two of us.
Was it for fear from success envy?
I think it was More for Used to Watch and Watch Movies -so Good- from the 80's, too young.
and about me... probably for selfanger and also for have never trained for the reason very few times I was truly Liking subject and being motivated. And also, cause the training and the focusing endured good number of years, 3-4 ones. I mean, I Liked Philosophy subjects at UOC, with Gonçal Mayos by instance, but this was very short time of focusing.
Do also Have to Admit there was not, then, an Existential Ressort for Jump Over what I was Reading, as much as also there was a lack of the same critic spirit of mind as the one I've developed on time. Mater of Maturity Needing for Freedom I had to face, when I was feeling a prisoner.
After breaking the mental prison (the one taught to me), All I Need is a little harmony, love and peace.
I Truly Have to say the jump I See in the way I'm developing my thinking on the paper, at the last philopoint I've done, is a real Qualitative Improvement. Tremendous to me. It's about a better conscious connection of all ideas at once on mind for the writing. This, so deep in mind, gives me a better explanatory and more connected skills for everything on the paper.
Well, See and see later, Good Brightness!! action smiley
flower cheers love smiley cheers flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:27 am

Some already childishist fun:
"oxytocine"= "ocho tocinos"= "eight bacons"= "eight pigs"= "eight times"= Fulfillment!
Smile Laughing Razz Laughing Smile
For some kind treatment of things. Key too action smiley Smile
flower love smiley flower


Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Sat Jun 11, 2016 4:54 pm

From now on only sharing philoadvance, nothing that as usual is bad understood for those who think are legitimated in Real life to Trying to condition my Life.
This way All Calm.
Tremendous advance as i said, focused though today resting till the night. Well... You know me scratch
Only 3 epigraphs Fine for third chapter. Yes. July is Mine! Lol
Greetings Good!
God Bless, Love!
flower love smiley flower

Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Sun Jun 12, 2016 6:22 pm

Really working day. Good siesta after.
Philo on the works too.
Easy to me, developing what still remains.
Good new conclusions on human reason.
And Wishing Good, Live Life Well. I actually Learnt to Do my best at it too, beside the Duty Present Always.
Goodness!
Peace and Love! action smiley Smile
flower love smiley flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Mon Jun 13, 2016 9:14 am

Good morning and Good Goodness!
Truly Focused though sleepy mind at the start of the week. Ready for it.
The Babies are Coming soon, I can say too; and it's Adorable thing. Part of the Family!
On key days for finsihing the essay, Concentrated, I'll be Able to Enjoy the Visit without losing rendiments.
And I know cause I'm able for also having my good time (Needed!), disconnecting for some time from Concentration Philosophy.
Sending Best Wishes and a Hug.
Love; whatever the form or choices on it, depending on each one, it's the Best Feeling We'll Ever Know, and the Key for the Future! action smiley Razz
flower cheers love smiley cheers flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:27 am

How Good Spirits for the Light Safe along the Road!
God Bless!
Good! Many Greetings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! action smiley cheers Smile
Tell Please Brooke Shields (telling it for the past and for the place we are) I'm so sorry for those circumstances of the stalker; I'm Sure the Police will Solve the situation Fast. And Please tell her She will Never (or Never more, depending on interpretations) have to face this from me.
Everything's going to be OK.
Have to say I came today for these two questions: Congratulations and sorries; well and for Wishing so Much Well! Razz
Love and Peace!
flower love smiley flower

ps: now some meal, and some good task.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Fri Jun 17, 2016 11:44 am

Hi!
Razz flower Razz

It's very good, to see the improvements I'm achieving; that I see as long as I'm fixing my ideas on papers. It's all making sense. And it's so big, the net of concepts, that sometimes it seems like "oh!!!!!" to me, when later, after thinking a little more, I see it's an obvious logic relationship. This is Great (not so much to my "high" iq demonstrationx geek Laughing Razz but to some certainty I'm making things well).
On the going.
Hugs Very Gently and Heartedly Respectful, Good Loving!
flower cheers love smiley cheers flower

ps: I Understand what's being tried to mean to me (or better maybe I should say: to make me understand scratch Laughing geek Razz ) it is there's a Bond Between, so Blessing to me!!
And when are we getting talky? ( childish geek Razz ; actually quite quiet, but Good).
action smiley Cool cheers bounce tongue smiley
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:26 am

Hi Good morning,
I've just known my Mother has fallen on the floor again -I can't remember how many times this is happened, I lost the account Mad -, and I think it's her knee, broken (both arms' she did go through, etc.).
I say it because though I'm still at my work and doing what I have to do, I don't think I'm going to be much dancing playful.
For many things, this is a...
But well, I have to keep going on, Concentrated. The stalking (virtual cinema, TV... -no the last months whosay- and real life) I'm been going under for last years has made me a colder person, unfortunetely cause it's real deep inside; but also stronger nerves, that's good in fact.
Wishing Well and Goodness.
Going also to Smash it, the tasking duty.
God Bless. Love.
flower love smiley flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Mon Jun 20, 2016 1:29 pm

Second post in the same subject.
Sharing.
"3.2.5.- El carácter de lo analítico.
Para explicar con cierta claridad el significado de la analiticidad es preciso efectuar una serie de aclaraciones previas.  Como hemos visto, el problema nace, sobre todo, con la filosofía analítica, cuyo máximo fundador (junto con Bertrand Russell) es Gottlob Frege.  Éste, en su artículo clásico Sobre sentido y referencia, sienta las bases de toda la discusión analítica posterior, de la cual aquí sólo hemos podido ofrecer una breve muestra.
Dicho artículo, pese a su enorme transcendencia histórica y objetiva, adolece de una serie de deficiencias importantes.  En primer lugar, como más conocida, la siguiente: no todo significado tiene una referencia determinada (contra lo que afirma Frege en suobra seminal), puesto que “el planeta más alejado de la Tierra”, por ejemplo, carece de aquélla.  De ahí, directamente, surgen los estudios de Donellan, entre muchos otros.
Pero el sistema conceptual inaugurado por Frege supone mucho más, y esto es lo que debemos analizar aquí al objeto de explicar bien qué es eso de la analiticidad.  Si recordamos, en su artículo, casi al comienzo, Frege proclama, casi como un conocimiento implícito y necesario previo a toda labor teórica de reflexión, que todo nuevo conocimiento reside en una constatación del tipo “a=b”, dado que “a=a” es una tautología (un apriorismo cartesiano poco útil en sede de la epistemología) que no incrementa el acervo cognitivo.  ¡Pues de ahí surgen todos los problemas!  Porque decir que “a=b” supone romper el principio de identidad, que es esencial a toda posibilidad del conocer, a todo pensar.  Sin principio de identidad no hay nada, sólo caos.
Imaginemos un sistema lógico de primer orden, que, de acuerdo con Gödel,  es consistente y completo.  Una de las condiciones fundamentales para ese sistema cumpla con esas condiciones es que, precisamente, “a=a”, “b=b”, “c=c”, etc.; pero nunca (todo lo contrario) puede plantearse la posibilidad de que en dicho sistema lógico ocurra que “a=b”.  Si se diera esa posibilidad, no estaríamos si quiera hablando de un sistema lógico1, al menos no constituido según los parámetros de la lógica de primer orden.
Por todo ello, la afirmación inicial de Frege resulta totalmente contradictoria con los elementos claves de la lógica formal que él mismo ayuda a instituir.  No creo que haya duda posible sobre si él era consciente de ello.  Tenía que serlo.  Su no se da en el ámbito puramente formal (a los efectos que expongo ahora, ya que en el ámbito formal Russell le hizo ver el problema que descubre su paradoja de los conjuntos); sino en su pretensión de hacer una translación a medias desde lo lògico a lo real.
Frege no comprende el papel -aunque trascendente- de la lógica en el lenguaje y el pensamiento, y por eso supone que es posible decir que “a=b”.  Pero nuestro razonar no puede eludir los principios lógicos fundamentales.  La igualdad en los términos algebraicos que él expresa en su teoría epistemológica sobre la referencia no puede darse entre “substancias” o elementos categorialmente distintos.  Así, válideamente es posible decir que “a=b+4/c-2”, por ejemplo, porque esto supone una operación en que el balance de la igualdad se refiere a relaciones algebraicas entre elementos o términos distintos.  Pero si rompemos la dualidad esencial y constitutiva de la “desigualdad” entre las variables, se rompe la operatividad lógica y/o matemática del sistema.
En el ámbito de las matemáticas (y, por supuesto, de la lógica), se produce una reducción cartesiana de los elementos complejos de la realidad, reduciendo ésta a una serie de magnitudes.  Gracias a ello, Galileo pudo elaborar sus fórmulas de co-variación entre mediciones categorialmente diversas para la tipología del movimiento uniformemente variado; y luego Newton formular su Teoría de la gravitación universal, y más tarde Einstein...
De seguro que a ninguno de ellos se le hubiera ocurrido afirmar que la categoría “a” del tiempo, por ejemplo, es igual a la categoría “b” del espacio; sino que existe una relación alfanumérica entre ambas, que puede llegar a resultar en que los dos casos den el resultado de “5”, pongamos por caso; pero sin obviar, en ningún supuesto, que dicho resultado tendrá un significado físico, y alfanumérico en las ecuaciones correspondientes, totalmente distinto.
Las diferencias son demasiado obvias.  En primer lugar, es evidente que las unidades de medida con que se describe (identifica) cada magnitud harán que ambas mediciones no sean intercambiables; pero es que, en términos generales, a nadie en su sano juicio se le ocurriría identificar el tiempo y el espacio.  ¿Por qué Frege cayó en su error, que implícitamente supone admitir tal incongruencia física y matemática?
En primer lugar, como he dicho, porque no comprende la co-implicación esencial entre las estructuras lógicas del pensamiento y su objeto; y, en segundo lugar, porque no comprende la importancia de la “reducción eidética” con que se opera en términos lógicos, frente a la “apertura” o indeterminación wittgensteniana del mundo físico, donde, incluso en los casos más evidentes, como la “hoja de un árbol”, la comunicación en el juego de lenguaje correspondiente sólo se da gracias a un “núcleo de significado común”, en el espacio abierto de la significación del juego.
En la lógica opera la “reducción eidética” de considerar que el “ser” de cada elemento del sistema es pura y estrictamente ser “a” o “b”..., es decir, ontológicamente, se produce una categorización, una descripción definida perfecta y cerrada para cada elemento constitutivo del sistema, el mismo que permite su formalización.  Así, es posible operar (incluso en términos matemáticos) con criterios de consistencia y completitud lógicas (al menos en sistemas lógicos de primer orden -en breve me referiré brevemente a esta diferencia esencial); donde el principio de identidad se hace  fácilmente auto-evidente en cualquier análisis, por las condiciones intrínsecas al carácter extensional -y, por ende, formal- de los preceptos lógicos.
En términos epistemológicos, esto no es así.  El propio Russell, en su última época, se encarga de diferenciar entre afirmaciones lógicas y afirmaciones epistemológicas en base al criterio de analiticidad: ser o no ser siempre verdaderas.  Y este último supuesto se produce como resultado de que cada elemento de la realidad supone una complejidad eidética constituida por múltiples elementos de la percepción y del razonamiento, lo cual representa la esencia de nuestras estructuras cognoscitivas de la mente-realidad.  El grado de la indeterminación lógica, en términos de una pretendida extensionalidad pura, es mucho mayor que el de una lógica de orden “n” que resulte operativa en términos matemáticos.  Ahí es dónde falla Frege, en su permanencia, pese a la diferenciación que efectúa entre significado y referencia, dentro de los parámetros de la extensionalidad lógica (el paradigma cartesiano) para un espacio cognoscitivo que no puede reconducirse a la misma.
Para comprender plenamente cómo puede funcionar la interacción entre la lógica y el pensamiento creo que será preciso leer hasta el final de este ensayo; sin embargo, hay una serie de cuestiones que ya pueden darse por evidentes.  La ya comentada reducción cartesiana de la realidad, referida, desde entonces, en términos de objetos/puntos en el espacio con una serie de propiedades dinámicas bien medibles (velocidad, posición en el espacio...) resultó óptima para clarificar los resultados de Galileo y de Newton, así como para dar pie a toda la ciencia y a la filosofía posteriores; pero no resultó tan útil a los efectos de la comprensión de la experiencia epistémica de la realidad, así como tampoco a los efectos de la comprensión de los mecanismos mentales de esa captación y de su inserción racional en un sistema de cognición.
Gracias a la reducción eidética de Descartes, se comprendió que una parte importante de la realidad que nos envuelve es medible y operable en términos matemáticos.  Esto es, que existe una relación directa y paralela entre la inferencia lógica y la inferencia causal derivada del principio de razón suficiente (tan nuclear, necesario y autónomo en nuestro pensamiento como el principio identidad, en los mismos términos que se pronuncia Aristóteles en su Metafísica).  Pero la filosofía cartesiana dejó un gran espacio vacío para la ignorancia respecto al origen e implicaciones epistémicas de este paralelismo (de ahí el positivismo de Augusto Comte, hasta llegar al positivismo lógico; o la “huída” que plantea el pragmatismo filosófico); así como a naturaleza y a sus límites intrínsecos, en términos de nuestra capacidad de cognición.
Frege ignora este punto, y, en su excesiva indeterminación del uso de las categorías lógicas en la realidad, llega a una contradicción frente a sí mismo, rompiendo lo más básico: el principio de identidad.  Ahí está la raíz de toda la problemática de la filosofía analítica posterior, si bien en ésta no se llega a dar respuesta a la necesidad que deja abierta la contradicción de Frege.  Por eso, para comprender la forma en que opera el conocimiento de la realidad mediante el lenguaje es preciso reflexionar sobre lo que se ha citado ya de los autores más relevantes de ese ámbito, pero, además, reconocer en  Wittgenstein el verdadero principio “radical” y necesario, en el sentido de instanciación de la verdadera esencia cualitativa del problema.  
Desarrollar la “indeterminación” o “apertura” de que habla este último, así como el papel “trascendente” de la lógica respecto del pensamiento, requiere de una explicación que, en el presente trabajo, aún está lejos de finalizar.  Por ello, en mis planteamientos, debo mantenerme en el método progresivo y mereológico del razonar, sin obviar ninguno de los puntos implicados.  Respecto de los cuales, dentro del presente epígrafe, me he referido a una serie de nociones que es preciso aclarar un poco más.  Hecho esto, espero concluir el presente con una comprensión más adecuada de lo que significa la analiticidad, en su relación con el conocimiento en general.
El punto que aún debo perfilar bastante antes de acabar es el relativo a la vigencia del Teorema de Godel respecto  de lógicas de segundo orden en adelante, y explicar las diferencias de estas últimas respecto de la lógica de primer orden, por lo que se refiere, fundamentalmente, a las repercusiones que se obtienen: erosión de los dos principios consubstanciales a lo analítico,  de consistencia y de completitud.
En la llamada lógica de segundo orden, la generación del significado proposicional se produce mediante la atribución de un carácter al elemento sujeto que no es un predicado  oclusivo en términos de “es”/”no es”; sino que se da una gradación de la cualidad ontológica del sujeto, una apertura “formalizada”.  Por ello, el sistema establecido de acuerdo con tales preceptos no puede ser tautológico, esto es, consistente y completo a la vez, en tanto que existe una determinación del mismo que rompe el principio de identidad como categoría “cerrada” de ser o no ser “tal cosa”.
No hay una reducción eidética completa en la lógica de segundo orden, sino meramente parcial.  Esto supone que nos encontramos ante un sistema ontollógico “abierto”, no hasta el punto en que se halla el lenguaje natural, tal como observa Wittgenstein mediante su traducción (el uso significativo de dicho lenguaje natural) a múltiples juegos con carácter ilimitado y abierto.  Por estos motivos, la formalización absoluta es un mero desideratum en esta clase de sistemas lógicos (o de orden superior).  El Teorema de Godel es históricamente clave, pero no es necesario para darse cuenta de estas notaciones fundamentales y auto-evidentes.
Una vez sentado todo lo anterior, creo que es posible sentar las bases de la analiticidad, en su comparación con la apertura del conocimiento y del lenguaje natural, donde no existe reducción eidética, sino un “núcleo óntico” de significación funcional. Dicho en  otras palabras, creo que puedo tratar de definir qué es lo que permite decir que lo analítico supone un carácter excluyente de los valores de verdad y falsedad, respectivamente y para todo caso.
La unidimensionalidad ontológica es la base de lo analítico.  En aquélla, ser “a” sólo representa ser “a” en un espacio constituido de leyes formales e igualmente analíticas.  Ahí está el punto dirimente de lo analítico, sin más.  Cualquier otro sistema proposicional y/o de pensamiento carecerá de esta propiedad, y dará entrada a unos niveles variables (si es lógica de segundo, tercer... orden; o si ya es, directamente, la relación ontoepistémica mente-realidad en términos de totalidad filosófica) de lo que Wittgenstein denomina “indeterminación” no formalizable; con independencia de que las reducciones científicas (cartesianas, en términos filosóficos) de la realidad operen funcionalmente para la predicción de los fenómenos físicos conforme a principios de inferencia causal, paralela a la inferencia lógica (con la diferencia de que en esta última no tiene lugar ni el tiempo, ni el espacio).  Precisamente el problema del holismo epistemológico que denuncian tanto un demasiado radical Quine, cuanto un más moderado Popper, tiene su origen en la apertura de significado lógico de estos sistemas.
Otra cuestión importante, y directamente relacionada con cada uno de los elementos argumentales que se citan, así como con el conjunto del nodo argumentativo, es el problema de los axiomas o principios del sistema.  Todo sistema lógico requiere de unos axiomas que han de presidir la tautología que se debe desarrollar a partir de éstos en el seno del sistema y para el supuesto de las lógicas de primer orden.  Y lo mismo sucede en las otras lógicas, con la diferencia de que la tautología “de desarrollo” sólo resultará parcial.
Pero en la realidad, la cuestión es mucho más compleja, y debe relacionarse con el problema de la “autorreferencia”, a su vez, directamente relacionado con la “autorreflexión” no sólo crítica sino también fundacional (es este último punto en el que me interesa insistir ahora) que reclaman filósofos como Gadamer, Apel, Habermas, alejados del paradigma positivista y formalista que se origina con las teorías de Frege.  
Es precisamente la imposibilidad holística de fijar un punto de partida inamovible en el pensamiento humano, a modo de axioma, la que me dio en su momento el impulso necesario para profundizar en la cuestión del conocimiento y la consciencia humana; tras comprobar que el llamado trilema de Münchhausen y todo lo que éste supone no tienen solución en términos de positivismo lógico y lenguaje proposicional (y ello ha quedado demostrado en este apartado).  Al fin, me di cuenta de que el motivo es que no hay equiparación posible entre lo lógico y lo epistemológico; pero no sin mantener una necesidad de realismo natural, a partir de la intuición biológica auto-evidente de sobrevivirme a mí mismo, a cada segundo que pasa en el mundo.
Hay varias cuestiones que se hacen evidentes por sí mismas a nuestra razón, como ya decía Aristóteles respecto del principio de identidad.  En primer lugar, sin duda, está la comprensión de que todo razonamiento o juicio epistemológico requiere de un fundamento previo.  Pero, si el trilema no tiene solución, qué hacer, dónde hallar una salida al problema.  El punto de partida sólo puede ser la quiebra definitiva del monopolio lógico-causal cartesiano en la comprensión de la realidad -ruptura que, al menos en las bases de su naturaleza y condiciones, creo haber explicado aquí.  Y ello debe ponerse en conexión con la cuestión de la autorreferencia.  
Por otra parte, todo ello está directamente relacionado con la noción de verdad, valor que Frege designa (erróneamente) como referencia de las proposiciones. Porque es precisamente esa noción de “valor” la que distingue necesariamente la noción de verdad respecto del plano analítico, excepto si aquélla es considerada en términos estrictos de correspondencia formal y tautológica en el cuadro ordenado y sistematizado de una lógica de primer orden, con sus correspondientes axiomas.
A su vez, ese carácter valorativo y ese hallarse afuera del discurso lingüístico (considerado éste último como una objetivización de lo epistémico), como un metalenguaje tarskiano; entroncan de un modo directo con esa necesidad autorreferencial problemática, al menos en el paradigma post-cartesiano, que va más allá del significado analítico. Y, si bien puede entenderse que hay una correspondencia entre las conclusiones sobre el nueva significado lingüístico que propongo descubrir y el “conocer todas las condiciones por las que una oración es verdadera” (como suele decirse en la filosofía analítica, pero sólo respecto del significado fregeano, esto es, el sentido); para aclarar la noción de verdad es preciso refererise a un sentido pre-lingüístico (aunque también coetáneo y post-lingüístico, como un proceso), y a la específica conexión ontoepistémica entre mente y mundo, la cual, del modo que espero aclarar aquí, es la única que puede dar razón de cierto grado justificado de certeza cognitiva -pese a que conocer todas las condiciones de verdad, como diría el propio Wittgenstein, se antoje como una ilusión excesiva- y de superación del famoso trilema.
Todo ello impone la necesidad de un nuevo dimensionamiento de la razón, susceptible de retrotraer la problematicidad (la gravedad de ésta) de la discusión sobre lo analítico al período clásico de la filosofía, pero sólo una vez transitado de forma crítica todo el camino posterior a aquél, y una vez se ha procedido a comprender todo lo que ello supone en términos de comprensión ontoepistemológica, simbólica-conceptual, trascendental, transcendente y “funcionalmente metafísica” del mundo. Prosigamos, por tanto, el camino de nuestra mente, bien ínsita en el mundo".

And I Think I Deserve that my Family Deserve a Chance.
God Bless us All!
flower love smiley flower

15:30 pm, and ON: I've added little paragraph on the truth. As I'm Waiting for the results from tests my Dear Mom is going through ("radiographies" and so).
God Bless!
flower love smiley flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Wed Jun 22, 2016 4:47 pm

Hi!
Still in the hospital. Now for my sista Marga.
Proves medical done.
Think its going to be OK Everything.
Nerves OK.
Love and Peace im Sending True!
flower love smiley flower
action smiley

Ps: Nice interviews! If theres one new ill watch when i can, as soon i can.
Hugs Loving Gentle!!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:43 am

Hi!
Here in the patio just behind Nandas house.
Its been a pretty long time.
How to count the days, when days are, even among othet good things, fulfiñlrd with this bullshit!
I cant.
Here i am, well at sight knowing the DEVIL's Spy; looking to him to the eyes.
I just can say he sucks!
And this is a part pf the world we are going to have to be in?
I know All involved with this; and its Tragic.
And Comic too. Now they sent the dog to scare me...
As i said, it sucks. All.
Well, i Have to Stay Focused, this EVIL is Not the end. It cant be this.
Better days are Waiting for me.
For saying one, tomorrow the Babies Come!!!!!!!!!!
God Bless.
Universally, i Love Human!
flower love smiley flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:52 am

Morning, light; i know i was right yesterdays night.
God Bless.
Much Loving and Life!
Mine is going to be busy with my Actual First Dream: Enjoy Childrem Time!
Perfect ways, for more i have to say, as i dont want parenting me; just Loving. Inspiring, for more, for the Task ive got ahead, that its not leaving much free time to me for the last and coming years.
Goodness!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Wed Jun 29, 2016 12:27 pm

Embarassed action smiley on those sport-shoes, Looking Truly Adorable! action smiley cheekey smiley bounce
flower cheers love smiley cheers flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Wed Jun 29, 2016 11:42 pm

Today in Alcudia at 7 am a man burnt 80% of the body of her supposed soulmate. She had time to go out of the house and take the 2 years old baby with her, saving the kid, and reaching the police station (or the hospital, not sure). She's critic state now, fearing true for her life. God Bless!
To have almost Totally Rationalized actually the stupidness and the evilness of Human is Not a calming "pill" before these things.
Education. EDUCATION AND EDUCATION.
Not only for men, but also, Very Intense ways, for the women: to Understand what They can and what They Can't Handle, for Love or for any other thing. And just the same in the opposite case, when the Offended are the men.
When I was 22 I fell on depression, for failed illusions of love and for a big deception on human moral behaviour, and for my perception of my own future; as long as I had not had the Appropiate Education for facing this, Emotional Intelligence.
Now that I Understand All, JUST ALMOST, I Can't Fall again. Cause it¡s something Personal. My TRUE UNDERSTANDING against my SENSE OF MORAL AND TRUTH. It's Not important, if actually or at last this ends involving only myself. It's an inner fight, transcending to the outside the ways I Choose Free, that can Never stop.
I'm Praying.
flower love smiley flower

ps: I don't think I'm watching any more New Movies of You. And Not because they're not Good or not Beautiful, They Really Are; but just cause I See there's the same Bitter Feeling Against me, Enduring and Eternity through All media too I guess. And I Don't Need to handle it for any longer time, and I Don't deserve it. Though, when I Think about it, it does Not affect me very much. Mainly, I'm a little angry with myself now, for have fallen in watching the New Movie again. How stupidly printed feeling on my hearted mind. What the h... I was thinking about!
These are probably some of the last "direct" words I'm telling you. Life does Not end in You. How Good! geek cheers Razz
It took me a more than 600 pages essay and almost a doctorate to understand it, after I came for the first time! action smiley cheekey smiley Razz
All Together as One, the Good ones (there's Always Time for Becoming!), as far as it's Possible; it is Much Better.
Human... Written on big letters... All I Know is that i'ts a True Part of almost us All.
I'm Focused on this Part. It Feels Good! tongue smiley
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Thu Jun 30, 2016 12:22 pm

I was Very Razz at whosay Posting, Good! action smiley cheekey smiley
And also came for saying I've got fixed all of the points of point 3.3 (three key ones), and also the three key corresponding to the fourth chapter. Some things I still have to think about where do fit better in the system, but the main structure and subjects are very clear.
Also, a Definitively Fixed conclusion on mind (new, though not so very much, as long this is one of main reasons I was working for): the Parmenid and Heraclit problems come from the confrontation between a perspective treating and departuring from the "extensionality" for getting absurd conclusions related terms to visible reality (for the first case) and another one treating direct terms what's visible (the change) forgetting the real "substitutives" of the logic extensionality (conceptuality and structure of reality).
The one and the multiplicity do get Solved by the Constitution of the "opened" and integrative Conceptuality.
God job (better than Plato and Aristotile, who tried first to solve those problems; I was Born Humble so Innately geek Laughing Smile ).
flower love smiley flower

Blessings and Greetings.
It's really hot today. I'm not going to the outside, walking later in the evening/night. Taking Care, of All, True.
It is Possible, to Trascend All of the Nonsense in the real life, getting Well into it, and by a Truly Conscious -and Good- Well Hearted Mind.
flower cheers love smiley cheers flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Thu Jun 30, 2016 12:58 pm

Attention Please, the Most Universal and Greatest of All Geniuses in Human History has to make a second post in the same subjet Laughing cheers bounce geek
Finishing this primitive conclusions reaching the definitive status of my theory (when I finish the essay): the key is in the metaphysics of the change (Zenon, Parmenid, easy), and to understand the paralellism to the human concept. This metaphysics is a part of our mind, corresponding to the impossibility of us to reduce our thinking to the extensionality (as logics, formal type). Thanks to this opened character of the human thinking, this can be conceptual, creative ("abduction"), trascending and abstract; differently to human made machines. Reason and Living.
flower love smiley flower

bounce cheers hasi action smiley Razz study Smile
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Mon Jul 04, 2016 9:28 am

Good morning, Fine day,
another working one here. Though all the things "disturbing" undercover in my real life, and even though the normal ones, I would be the same: quite Calmy. Going down with the brain for a while Felt and Feels and will Feel so Good. My speed will be lower when I start again, from today. Don't need to go so fast, now that I've got time. A Human Being...
Wanted to share a couple of things from news, but I'll do tomorrow. Today wanted to mark the Video from Unicef, Starring Anano. Highly Recommending it. I guess it will make everybody think.
About it, I think superfficiality is affecting us much more than we think. A kid, the same, THE ESSENCE OF THE CASE, but people treating different depending on her clothes... Interculturality problems Do come from the same functional skills of our brain. Animals do not perceive this kind of things, their instinct tell them much Directly if another one from their same species (or another one, like preys by hunters, specially) is healthy, ill, ready for sex, fight, play...
No matter how deceived this question does make me, it's the truth. Hermeneutic and Heidegger's cercle of culture is really determining our actions.
though, I think the developing of self-knowledge, self-consciousness and solidarity is a Possibility so Real, where the horizon is unknown though looking so far, and that's remains as a field for action that's almost virgen in our societies, where the key is dominating the other/others (money, power, and flattering by showing cars, jewels, expensive dresses, paints, beautiful partners... as a social prestige).
Anyway, I'm actually Seeing many Beautiful things, specially from some People posting in whosay web. Good Job, Nice!
We're all making little things, but the seed for a better future for our kids, do need, first of all, the effort. Only time will tell if our species survive for another 1.000 years, less or more (I'm not against exploring planets, but we have to be realistic about chances for going to live there, for the next couple of centuries, at the very least, I guess). But, first of all, there's the Need for Working on it.
Many Greetings, Have Very Good Day!
Love and Peace!
flower love smiley flower

ps: Very Nice Running Wild, Brooke Looking... More than Tremendous! cheekey smiley cheers action smiley

Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Tue Jul 05, 2016 12:01 pm

Today, for all the stuff on, I was feeling a little nervous inside, this Video was very Key for Relaxing.
Though what I just said, I have been working Very Well the mind for getting like definitive conclusions on symbolism and conceptuality and abstract thinking; differencing logics, brain of animals and brain of us.
All Key Points Fixed.
Animals analize reality by categories that are primigenious conceptes, we analize the same concepts. For this we can create new concepts, symbols and culture which are over the level of the reality.
In both, animal and human, categories/concepts are always together with emotion (as the symbol). All action does mean emotion. Learning, just only, by instance, too.
Without emotion, there's nothing.
From this we can go to the difference related to the logic extensionality, where this is just a field of thinking which brings (made by human abstraction) the Key Laws of our thinking, connected to symbolism.
In animals there's no just extension. The category of a prey, by instance, it is graduated in so many forms: large, little, young, healthy... and each sub-category is a new place for more, in their integrative brain (as us). This is also a logic (logic laws are the expression of all logics used by the animals with brain: if not, No survival in the specific world we are living) of "n" order, more than first order, which is the only one we can consider at the same level of extensionality.
This is very schematic ways explaining the definitive conclusions of mine.
These last days of resting mind from thinking "deep" have been key. I'm taking the rest of this week for this staying.
Starting the write in the next one.
Also, taking all of the first 15 days of august for doing nothing. If I finish in august, second 15 days, OK; and if I need some days from september for definitive first version of essay (not going to change much substance, just forms, mainly), it's OK too. The possibility for the extension of my period for doctorating changed everything, as long as one month less or more do mean much less than it was meaning when I had to deliver the definitive thesis in abril 2017.
Blessings!
And Thanks for the Video, All I said and, also, Calming.
Good Hug Gentle, Loving Forever!!
flower cheers love smiley cheers flower

Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Wed Jul 06, 2016 11:31 am

Truly, this is not a doors closing or a last good-bye. I Just NEED some time for the Rest of my Psyche and, with it, for Finishing my Book Well. This is All. It's just about Disconnecting from the Internet, Emotional terms, a little for some time.
action smiley
cheekey smiley flower I Love Brooke True Forever! flower cheekey smiley
flower cheers tongue smiley love smiley tongue smiley cheers flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Mon Jul 11, 2016 1:27 pm

When I write my essay on morals (I think I'm starting "Ética Nicomaquea" from ARistotile one of these days, for good flowing of mind, changing perspective only focused on epistemology for a while), it's going to be key to Define the concept of human.
First, evolutive terms.
in this perspective, competition and fight is not essentialy human.  Abstraction and metaphysics really are, in the other side.
As a bigger amount of mirror neurones, huger empathy and Moral Sense (Much More Developed, in any case).
Obviously, when somebody is doing something wrong, or bad, it's a human thing.  Obvious.
Then, my theory will need some metaphysic fundament, different to my epistemology, which is very coherently connected to the integrative mind and its logics and its "feeling of knowing" and its sense.
This fundament has to be dual, I guess.
First, connection to nature.
SEcond, at the same level of importance, some distinctive character, where we could define something as "uniquely" human, or almost.
It's true human makes war, and genocide.
But ximpanzes do things very simmilar.  And lions, by instance, when they've got big number enough (one real case of 6 lions in the same group proves this).
Human can make others suffering only for the pleasure of it (power, superiority), but wolves, by instance, when do find a group of lambs inside of a closed place, do almost destroy with no eating almost all animals they can.  Pleasure of blood is there too.
Fundamenting my theory and its conclusions, I'll be departuring from this point.  What's Qualitatively Only Human I think it can be Proved is the Totally Defined Moral Sense, even against the same selfish interests of oneself, and the Global Feelings of Solidarity.
Inuit People (many problems they have now, like suicide numbers or alcoholism, I think it's caused by the contact, even though only virtual, to our modern society: it's a real "breaking" of their existential sense, kept for centuries and thousands years, what I think it's happening to some of them on these days) don't know the meaning of "war", by instance.  Their solidarity and hospitality (important in that physical context) was Always proverbial and well known.
I think our distinctively human mechanisms for moral solidarity can be Improved to points we can not even imagine, on these days.  The enormeous weight of history and culture do not let us see it, I think: the cultural integration inside of societies and in the world, as a MetaSense before other signs from culture, could be developed.
Main problems: as I said, weight of culture and history.  But there's an specific one for our "megasocieties": there's not the social sanction (just the worry for "what will they say, if I don't help this member of the community!" is enough) for unsolidary behaviours, as long as anonymous existence is the rule, on these days.
The only solution that comes to my mind is the progressive implemention, by progrssive participation and education of all, specially from the very little kids.
There will always be people who don't care for others, or who care less; but excepting case of biologic psycopathy (its very discussed, even on these people, what's educational and what's biologic; to what I know, most of doctors say it's a combination: genetics and very traumatic experiences from childhood that were not sublimated and accepted as Sense in Progress for the Living), I think many Good things can Happen, by the Help and Good Intentions of All.

ps: well, after all, I think the metaphysic fundament on morals is connected, as on epistemology, of course; but it's not taking the role of an evanescent-non well proved fundament; the same happening on my epistemology. The metaphysic fundament is in all last fundaments for anything, and it's in the way our brain processes our judgements, epistemic or moral ones, for the symbolism there's in both cases.
for this, to Investigate First well the structure of processes of human intelligence and knowledge is Key; because Morals is Emotivity, as Hume or Rorty (from very different points of view) say, and "Authomatism" from "getting on mind the situation of the other" by the mirror neurones (this is also working for the learning of anything; for this the importance of role models for kids and everybody: there's a cognitive plus for the education there, imitation); but it's Also Reason and Judgement. We Can and We Need to Explain, to others and to ourselves, the Moral Choices.
It's Not so different to epistemic reason, then, cause this last one does also have the Value of Truth inside.
Obviously, there're different parts of the brain working (mirror neurones Always Involved, by instance, differently to epistemic knowledge; and the Emotion is probably more intense, usually, and in any case, different to epistemic one); but we also Need there to Make Sense by Integration of different Choices involved with moral judgement (not necessarily linguistically expressed, as it happens with epistemic judgements); and we Need to Make Critic Sense on our mechanisms of moral sense that we learnt cultural terms. There, philosophy and ethics are key. And it's so Important, as I've Tried by these litte space of words, Fundament of Morals Can Be Explained, as all specific practic judgements we may do through the days. Morals are an Emotional but Also a Cognitive Source. That's GREAT for any Community.
flower love smiley flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
david

avatar

Anzahl der Beiträge : 13548
Anmeldedatum : 2009-06-01

PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   Thu Jul 14, 2016 3:24 pm

Good Goodness.
Now to some Needed meal and rest. Later more tasking. Handling well, with the brain. Not obsessive explanation on everything again and for each time better in my head. Better flowing. Authomatic pilot when walk and stretch, that's OK.
Greetings Good!
See and see later and a Loving Hug!
flower cheers love smiley cheers flower
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Philosophers   

Back to top Go down
 
Philosophers
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 8Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Brooke Shields Fan Family :: BROOKE FAN FAMILY FORUM :: LOUNGE-
Jump to: