Theory of Everything - View Single Post

Guille · 12:25 AM

*** ASSIMILATED ***

What does "assimilated" mean? You've saved it or something?

Anwya, coming back to qualia. If we define Nomena to be all that occurs but is not subjective and phenomena all that is percieved and thus subjective, from Nietzchenian philosophy, then, if we add the concept of Ereignis from the Heideggerian philosophy, we are in trouble, for Ereignis means that which is true. But that which is true I have already proved, is a qaulia, the qualia which is nomena, by definition. But nomena is the objective reality, whiles Ereignis is the objective truth. Here we enter into kierkegaardian philosophy, who distinguished between subjective truths; those that if come to be false, would change the form of being of an entity, and objective truths; those that wouldn't change the form of being of any entity, i.e. those that are simply facts, in contrast to the others which are believes. But here we come into Descartes's philosophy, by which all that really exists is that which is known, i.e. which is proven to be true, and is true by nature, but here we come into phenomenology, by which that which is true is not needed to be proven to be true; it is true in itself, but here we go into Nietzche again, who said there are truths by themselves subjective (Phenomena) and truths by themselves objective (Nomena).

That was stupid. I'm stupid, and if you think I'm not you are wrong, for the actual fact that I think I'm stupid impplies that I'm stupid.

I was trying to build up a proper philosophy about qualia from the philosophical knowledge I've got. How can I be trapped, being out of the circle? Nietzche-Heidegger-Kierkegaard-Descartes-Husserl-Nietzche is exactly what I've made. I'll be strongly and trascendentally philosophyzing about this all time, even in my dreams... I wish I am as lucky as Descartes as to develop one of my most important contributions to humanity, in a dream. Maybe hsi qualia was of good quality, and actually we can differentiate the quality of qualia? Maybe Mike's fracta dialectics of mathematical motion and quality can help solve this?

	(#3 (permalink))
Guille The Thinker Status: Offline Posts: 3,278 Thanks Given: 14 Thanked 9x in 9 Posts Join Date: Mar 2005 Rep Power: 47	11-22-2005, 02:08 PM * ASSIMILATED * What does "assimilated" mean? You've saved it or something? Anwya, coming back to qualia. If we define Nomena to be all that occurs but is not subjective and phenomena all that is percieved and thus subjective, from Nietzchenian philosophy, then, if we add the concept of Ereignis from the Heideggerian philosophy, we are in trouble, for Ereignis means that which is true. But that which is true I have already proved, is a qaulia, the qualia which is nomena, by definition. But nomena is the objective reality, whiles Ereignis is the objective truth. Here we enter into kierkegaardian philosophy, who distinguished between subjective truths; those that if come to be false, would change the form of being of an entity, and objective truths; those that wouldn't change the form of being of any entity, i.e. those that are simply facts, in contrast to the others which are believes. But here we come into Descartes's philosophy, by which all that really exists is that which is known, i.e. which is proven to be true, and is true by nature, but here we come into phenomenology, by which that which is true is not needed to be proven to be true; it is true in itself, but here we go into Nietzche again, who said there are truths by themselves subjective (Phenomena) and truths by themselves objective (Nomena). That was stupid. I'm stupid, and if you think I'm not you are wrong, for the actual fact that I think I'm stupid impplies that I'm stupid. I was trying to build up a proper philosophy about qualia from the philosophical knowledge I've got. How can I be trapped, being out of the circle? Nietzche-Heidegger-Kierkegaard-Descartes-Husserl-Nietzche is exactly what I've made. I'll be strongly and trascendentally philosophyzing about this all time, even in my dreams... I wish I am as lucky as Descartes as to develop one of my most important contributions to humanity, in a dream. Maybe hsi qualia was of good quality, and actually we can differentiate the quality of qualia? Maybe Mike's fracta dialectics of mathematical motion and quality can help solve this? Last edited by Robert : 11-29-2005 at 12:25 AM.