just letting you all know....

[Tapeworm]

Ok you're over my head there.  But is there no common ground?  I'd be more inclined to say people's interpretations are colored by their life experience, but surely we can agree that the external world is commonly experienced and independent of individual interpretation.

Yes, I agree. When I stated that "everyone reality is dependent upon..." I didn't mean that we literally experience reality differently, unless you suffer from delusions or hallucinations. For most people, their senses experience the same external world; that is, if one person sees a tree outside, there is a good chance another person will see the same tree. So, yeah, that is the common ground. However, the interpretation that is attached to that tree or any other object in the external world is dependent on interpretation, which is often colored by life experiences.

Hope I am making sense.  

I think we're on the same page.

Yep.  Just making sure we didn't have a hardcore old school skeptic on board here. 

[SF1900]

Ok you're over my head there.  But is there no common ground?  I'd be more inclined to say people's interpretations are colored by their life experience, but surely we can agree that the external world is commonly experienced and independent of individual interpretation.

My principal objection to Neitzche's thought (about which I know very little) is his villification of the so-called Apolonian.  Strikes me that posessing reason is part of being human, and is even presupposed by any analysis of how cool Dionysian behavior supposedly is.  

My principal objection to Neitzche's thought (about which I know very little) is his villification of the so-called Apolonian.  Strikes me that posessing reason is part of being human, and is even presupposed by any analysis of how cool Dionysian behavior supposedly is.

I am nowhere near an expert on Nietzsche. However, I often wonder how much of his work is taken out of context. Sort of like when the Nazis used his ideas to promote hatred of other races, etc. Personally, I don't see someone like Nietzsche totally opposing Apollonian ideas. I just think he didn't want people to lose the Dionysian side. Perhaps he thought people were going to lose that part of themselves.

[webcake]

smart thread..........no dobut about it.

[SF1900]

Yep.  Just making sure we didn't have a hardcore old school skeptic on board here.  

Nah, definitely not that.

Next question:

Man, inherently good, inherently evil, or blank slate?

Jean Jacque Rosseau - inherently good
Thomas Hobbes - inherently evil
John Locke - inherently a blank slate

Hmm.............

I am going with a blank slate, however, current thinking sort of disproves that notion. Steven Pinker, an evolutionary psychologist at Harvard, believes that we are all born with the innate drive to form in-and-out groups and to have language capabilities. Noam Chomsky also talks about the Language Acquisition Device which is an innate structure that governs language. His argument: it is no coincidence that most infants begin to talk around the same age. Thus, there must be some inherent device that is triggered around the same age.

Though, for the most part, I still think people are a blank slate.

[Tapeworm]

My principal objection to Neitzche's thought (about which I know very little) is his villification of the so-called Apolonian.  Strikes me that posessing reason is part of being human, and is even presupposed by any analysis of how cool Dionysian behavior supposedly is.

I am nowhere near an expert on Nietzsche. However, I often wonder how much of his work is taken out of context. Sort of like when the Nazis used his ideas to promote hatred of other races, etc. Personally, I don't see someone like Nietzsche totally opposing Apollonian ideas. I just think he didn't want people to lose the Dionysian side. Perhaps he thought people were going to lose that part of themselves.

Even more tho, I wonder if these A & D 'halves' have any meaning outside of his own philosophy, and if they are entirely his own construction.  I'm reminded of the scene in Donnie Darko where he objects to the reduction of the range of human emotion to either Fear or Love.  I admit it seems natural to contrast reason to passion, but I view them more as interwoven threads in the fabric of my being than as polar opposites.  At least, I like to think that I'm an integrated being rather than an unfortunate amalgam of irreconcilable extremes.  It gets me through the night.

[BIG ACH]

Inherently Evil - yeah I took Ethics in undergrad baby!!!!  And the true test came when the professor wrote me at the end of the semester and asked what I got on the mid term exam because she lost the grades!  

[SF1900]

Even more tho, I wonder if these A & D 'halves' have any meaning outside of his own philosophy, and if they are entirely his own construction.  I'm reminded of the scene in Donnie Darko where he objects to the reduction of the range of human emotion to either Fear or Love.  I admit it seems natural to contrast reason to passion, but I view them more as interwoven threads in the fabric of my being than as polar opposites.  At least, I like to think that I'm an integrated being rather than an unfortunate amalgam of irreconcilable extremes.  It gets me through the night.

Well, I agree. I mean, I don't think you can have one without the other. But Nietzsche sort of contradicted himself by delineating between "A" & "D"

"There is always some madness in love. But there is also always some reason in madness."

Madness = emotion
Reason = rationality, skepticism, etc.

For Nietzsche, there is always some reason in madness.

Seems like he had no problem mixing emotion and reason together, especially when it came to love.

[SF1900]

Inherently Evil - yeah I took Ethics in undergrad baby!!!!  And the true test came when the professor wrote me at the end of the semester and asked what I got on the mid term exam because she lost the grades!  

 

Hmm, inherently evil. I don't know! For one, that would be almost impossible to prove. So, why do you think inherently evil?

[Tapeworm]

Nah, definitely not that.

Next question:

Man, inherently good, inherently evil, or blank slate?

Jean Jacque Rosseau - inherently good
Thomas Hobbes - inherently evil
John Locke - inherently a blank slate

Hmm.............

I am going with a blank slate, however, current thinking sort of disproves that notion. Steven Pinker, an evolutionary psychologist at Harvard, believes that we are all born with the innate drive to form in-and-out groups and to have language capabilities. Noam Chomsky also talks about the Language Acquisition Device which is an innate structure that governs language. His argument: it is no coincidence that most infants begin to talk around the same age. Thus, there must be some inherent device that is triggered around the same age.

Though, for the most part, I still think people are a blank slate.

Hey now, with your can 'o worms.  Define the terms, criteria for determination, etc.  In brief tho, I reckon we're both.

I don't DARE disagree with the biggies like Chomsky but I confess I have yet to be convinced of the foundational nature of language as shaping thought.  I would have thought we form 'unlanguaged' concepts before 'languaging' them, like I use pots and pans to make a meal but it's understood the meat and potatoes are the substance upon which the tools operate.

Good discussion.  Hate to split but have to run out for a little while.  Check back in later tho!

[tbombz]

heres one of my favorite qoute, from william james..

"slowly gathering yonder twilight.."

its taken out of context, but its in a critique of locke and others..   where he is speaking on the mistakes in breaking down experience into single simple perceptions, as he explains that experience is a whole.. not a collection of individual parts...

humans as a blank slate, inherently good, or inherently evil....    hmmm...    none of those..  this is a question with a spiritual answer 

[wavelength]

congrats man

[pellius]

You are the man Big Arch. Great role model. Hope to be just like you if or when I ever grow up.