141–150 of 159 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> which we all know are false I think you’re projecting your own beliefs onto others.
I was speaking a little loosely, but if you want to advance an argument for the empirical existence of abstract concepts, I'm sure I'd be interested.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think so, too (even though I haven't read it). That jibes with my own experiences in meditating. Part of the process is going through a quick scan of your body and just noticing how your different parts feel: "huh, there's tenseness in my jaw", "there's a headache", "there's soreness in my leg" etc. It's amazing how quickly you can turn that from "my head hurts" to "there's pain in my head", which is a subtle but i…
I also think that un-explained pain feels worse to one's mind. The fact that you used part of your brain to sense it changes that. I very often turn pain into a 'what are you telling me?', as if it was a form of communication. Half the time, the emotional grief vanishes.
For historical reasons, I get very tense when the vehicle I'm in goes fast around curves in the road. Last week, I started to get the tell-tale panicky sensation as my bus was flying through a big bend in the highway. I thought, "huh, I'm experiencing a stress response, aren't I?" Just being consciously aware of that immediately and drastically decreased the anxiety I was feeling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was speaking a little loosely, but if you want to advance an argument for the empirical existence of abstract concepts, I'm sure I'd be interested.
It’s not about what I believe. It’s that your original comment made it seem that everyone “knows” these things are false, which is not true (not even loosely).
I think Marvin Minsky had it right in his book The Emotion Machine (2006): From Chapter III. From Pain to Suffering >Why does the sensation called pain sometimes lead to what we call suffering? How could such a simple event distort all your other thoughts so much? This chapter proposes a theory of this: if a pain is intense and persistent enough, it will stir up a certain set of resources, and then these, in turn, ar…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not about what I believe. It’s that your original comment made it seem that everyone “knows” these things are false, which is not true (not even loosely).
Those are abstract concepts, which are considered to not be real by definition. I think you should find another fight to pick with someone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m saying they are distinctly different kinds of pain.
You’re saying it’s a different set of pain receptors firing, which are more uncomfortable? The fact that it feels different to you could just be that it’s a different context. Different “metadata” so to speak, with the same pain. Seems like GP thinks the metadata is making it worse, and you think the data is different. How would you tell the sifference?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those are abstract concepts, which are considered to not be real by definition. I think you should find another fight to pick with someone else.
By definition? I don't consider abstract concept to be not real by definition. I don't think you are using a definition that I am familiar with.
I think Marvin Minsky had it right in his book The Emotion Machine (2006): From Chapter III. From Pain to Suffering >Why does the sensation called pain sometimes lead to what we call suffering? How could such a simple event distort all your other thoughts so much? This chapter proposes a theory of this: if a pain is intense and persistent enough, it will stir up a certain set of resources, and then these, in turn, ar…
Sorry, language question, what does 'study' means in this context?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not about what I believe. It’s that your original comment made it seem that everyone “knows” these things are false, which is not true (not even loosely).
Those are abstract concepts, which are considered to not be real by definition. I think you should find another fight to pick with someone else.
So you claim that love, justice, truth, and honor are not real “by definition”? And, moreover, that everyone agrees with you on this?
> I think you should find another fight to pick with someone else.
Who’s “picking a fight” here? You’re being weirdly defensive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By definition? I don't consider abstract concept to be not real by definition. I don't think you are using a definition that I am familiar with.
Please find a serious argument.