I am looking at this haunting picture that I keep coming back to on this thoughtdock (and that Olive discussed earlier). I tried about four times to post something, but it never takes. It just says “Comment Cannot Be Blank.” This is a little interesting, since it suggests I am not here making the comment, or the comment will not be perceived as a comment if it doesn’t say the correct thing, but maybe the thoughtddoc software is not that intelligent or controlling.
HOWEVER, what about Locke, Hume, Berkeley and Kant and these doors. (Remember, I wrote this a long time ago.) What is the relation of seeing these doors in the photo, seeing doors in my life, and recognizing doorness? Locke would want to distinquish between the primary and secondary properties of these doors? Kant would say that I can’t know the door, only read doorness in based on my sensorial intuitions and conceptual categorization? Hume would say I see doors and this photo and that sensorial info makes me have the idea of three doors, and possibly the metaphor of three doors, and further the idea that someone may walk out of one of them (because of experience in the observation and use of doors, and constant conjuction)? Berkeley would say that the doors don’t exist without me seeing them?
What I wanted to say in my comment is that this photo reminds me of Dennett’s where am I: which door leads to me. One might represent the body, the flesh and fluids, hair color, specifics. One might be the connections in the brain, the mind/ cpu. One might be “me-ness” as a child of an immortal soul or set of genetic material that is reproducing and participating in the chain of being regardless of my personality.
For ethics, which is the one I am in when deciding something’s right or wrong? It seems like if you take this question, the answer of where am I becomes either door 2 or door 3, not 1.
One final thing: these doors are faked. If you look, it is a totally fake image with shadows going the wrong way. So what does that make the thought I had of doorness or the “me” that was imagined in association with each door? Or what does it make of the narrative that I envisioned – people exiting a door and a story beginning?
HiLo
HOWEVER, what about Locke, Hume, Berkeley and Kant and these doors. (Remember, I wrote this a long time ago.) What is the relation of seeing these doors in the photo, seeing doors in my life, and recognizing doorness? Locke would want to distinquish between the primary and secondary properties of these doors? Kant would say that I can’t know the door, only read doorness in based on my sensorial intuitions and conceptual categorization? Hume would say I see doors and this photo and that sensorial info makes me have the idea of three doors, and possibly the metaphor of three doors, and further the idea that someone may walk out of one of them (because of experience in the observation and use of doors, and constant conjuction)? Berkeley would say that the doors don’t exist without me seeing them?
What I wanted to say in my comment is that this photo reminds me of Dennett’s where am I: which door leads to me. One might represent the body, the flesh and fluids, hair color, specifics. One might be the connections in the brain, the mind/ cpu. One might be “me-ness” as a child of an immortal soul or set of genetic material that is reproducing and participating in the chain of being regardless of my personality.
For ethics, which is the one I am in when deciding something’s right or wrong? It seems like if you take this question, the answer of where am I becomes either door 2 or door 3, not 1.
One final thing: these doors are faked. If you look, it is a totally fake image with shadows going the wrong way. So what does that make the thought I had of doorness or the “me” that was imagined in association with each door? Or what does it make of the narrative that I envisioned – people exiting a door and a story beginning?
HiLo
No comments:
Post a Comment