[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by WithoutMe Lloyd, If that be so, then we would be able to do what Russel & Whitehead once attempted (thru their collosal work).... Can we then equate the whole of life, reality & existence as symbols inter-connected by systems of logic?

Your sarcasm can be answered as, "Can if you want to."

But as you may know (me thinks from yur signature), Godel ruined all such plans, but let us not get stuck with that! Instead, if u do believe that there is this "innate" world of mathematics & logic, then I must say that you are one of the proponents of the "a priori" (God knows what Kant was thinking) theory, - that thing-in-itself exist without any relation of conformation.... is that so??

Your absolute knowledge of philosophy is pro-found!

My whole pt. is, even if the noumenal world do exist & as Kant says, there is no way to know it, then why all thus fuss on something which will never yeild a result, one that is not theoretical or verbal but one that can be felt as the hard surface of the keyboard that I am feeling?

Philosophers of note have known Kant wrong for over a century. Where have you been? The thing in itself can be known much, much deeper. Stop setting up arguments, and maybe we could learn.

By this, I am not saying that the noumenal world doesnot exist, neither am I saying that it does exist, what I am instead saying, is that i DONT KNOW!

That's for sure!

Now, can one live with this dont know & not investigate into this "dont know", coz by that one may reach to an answer, but as the answer will be that of thing-in-itself, there would be no way in verifying it with our senses & emotions.... Such a knowledge will be verbal throwouts, without much significance in the things that we actually feel!!! Do tell me, can you feel the number "2" without feeling the "2 candles"?

You feel. I choose to "Know."

I repeat -- I am not refuting the noumenal world nor am I onto it..... there is no way to know it as a thing I feel, coz by its very definition, it is a thing-in-itself!!!

Thing in itself is just a stupid, lazy deffinition for god. Get out of religion and come into the house of science.

I maintain the same stance for all things meta-physical, as I am unable to infer whether a meta-physical statement/theory/proposition is true or false, as they are out of the scope of verification! Note here, I am neither propagating the idea of "logical positivism". Infact, Wittgentein himself quite shrugged of the "Vienna Circle"... in one instance, when he was invited to the Vienna Circle & asked abt something he wrote on his Tractacus, he instead recited a poem by Rabindranath Tagore..... frankly speaking, if you extend any line of "logic" (be it syllogistic or whatever), it ultimately runs down to a paradox & thus, becomes out of our very zone of testing & hence verification. In that way, if we start of theorize or quantize or solve anything in life, what we will get is a bunch of verbal throwouts, whereas life, to me, is much more than that.... life is just THIS!

Wittgenstein, not very smart - was he?

Trying to investigate, we postulate, extend, simulate, & all this just takes us away from the initial state of mind which is the basis for our knowledge, -- a very dont know mind, but an unsettled mind, & it presumes that it'll be satifisfied when it gets some verbal throwout!!!! Why this need to know? What is the source of this Will-To-Truth?

Just avoiding stupidity, thank-you!

Is there a sense of "lack" behind all this quest for truth/knowledge/theories & God-knows-what-not???

Thanks for your contribution to the post-modern mind of self-proving insanity.

Regards, wM. PS. Going thru theories, ideas, notions, postulates, one ultimately reaches a dead-end, that one simply "doesnt know"....lol!

You sure don't!!! A very important aspect of philosophy is about knowing what we don't know. This is true. It's also about knowing what we know we do know.

regards