Justifying reality

[Jason]

Philosophy and enlightenment: what exactly are we trying to justify with them? Reality? What is there to justify? Can't you see it, experience it, feel it? It is all here. This is it. Right now. Everywhere. It is right before your eyes, this is it. This is all.

[Jason]

(Hi all. Yes this is Jason from the previous incarnations of the Genius lists for those who remember. Didn't want to water down any impact my first post might have by introducing myself at the same time.)

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Welcome back then, Jason.

What are you talking about your senses and feelings, impressions? My dog has the same philosophy.

Why worrying about the impression you make on your entrance? Sounds you're not interested in philosophy as truth seeking but you're seeing it purely as style?

[Jason]

Welcome back then, Jason.

What are you talking about your senses and feelings, impressions?

I am talking about everything. Everything that I experience, everything that makes up existence and reality to me, nothing at all exluded.

My dog has the same philosophy.

In a certain sense your dog could be said to have the same philosophy.

Why worrying about the impression you make on your entrance? Sounds you're not interested in philosophy as truth seeking but you're seeing it purely as style?

The actual configuration/style/order of words can possiby change the impact and effect that people experience from those words, and thus delivery can account for something. This is especially true in this case as I am trying to convey something that is rather experiential, and introducing myself beforehand would I think tend to water down what I was trying to convey.

[DHodges]

Philosophy and enlightenment: what exactly are we trying to justify with them?

I'm not getting where you are going with this. Why do you think that somebody is trying to justify something?

[DHodges]

My dog has the same philosophy.

My dog refuses to discuss philosophy. However, from his actions, his philosophy seems to be something along the lines of "treats are good."

So I guess he's a utilitarian.

[sevens]

Don't think in terms of 'justifying' Reality. Think 'discovering' Reality, in all its Infinity. The purpose of philosophy is to sketch and mark borders - for exploration - and then just as easily, erase them - for Truth. Truth is the starship towards Enlightenment. Enlightenment is Reality.

(insert NASA stock footage of the Discovery voyages)

[BrianT]

But isn't it true that truth is undefinable?

[Diebert van Rhijn]

What are you talking about your senses and feelings, impressions?

I am talking about everything. Everything that I experience, everything that makes up existence and reality to me, nothing at all excluded.

Experience, all experience "an sich" is the domain of our imagination. In this sense it's no different from having a dream or opinion about something. It's the 'pure' world of children and animals, which many people, caught in their mazes of false reasoning, are living indeed too detached from for no good reason at all. But a philosopher starts from the explored depth of his experience and willingly accesses the world of reason and abstracts to arrive, because he has to arrive, wants it like nothing else, at the foundations of core existence itself, which ultimately cannot be held in mere concepts: it breaks through and permeates the body, mind, soul and experience. Any shortcut using mere experience has to be deception, since our experiences are basically that, left by themselves.

..... as I am trying to convey something that is rather experiential, and introducing myself beforehand would I think tend to water down what I was trying to convey.

You're more like a poet then!

[Leyla Shen]

Oh my God, Diebert, how those words resonate like a timeless melody in the soul.

[sevens]

Diebert,

He's got a poetic sense, alright.

And, he's interested in true philosophy.

Give the man some room.

[Jason]

Philosophy and enlightenment: what exactly are we trying to justify with them?

I'm not getting where you are going with this. Why do you think that somebody is trying to justify something?

When Reality is inescapable, everywhere and everything, and yet one tries to find it and capture it, describe and devise philosophical systems to try to grapple with it - this is what I call attempting to justify reality.

Perhaps as important as asking "What is the ultimate truth of reality?" is also asking "Do I actually lack the ultimate truth of reality?" What would be the use in searching for something if you already have it?

My own past philosophy and the writings on this forum seem generally to fall into that category of trying to justify reality where no justification is needed. So I am asking the question, somewhat rhetorically, but also as a question for the reader to ask themselves - what are you trying to justify with your philosophising, what truth or understanding do think you are lacking right now?

[Jason]

What are you talking about your senses and feelings, impressions?

I am talking about everything. Everything that I experience, everything that makes up existence and reality to me, nothing at all excluded.

Experience, all experience "an sich" is the domain of our imagination. In this sense it's no different from having a dream or opinion about something. It's the 'pure' world of children and animals, which many people, caught in their mazes of false reasoning, are living indeed too detached from for no good reason at all.

I don't speak German :) "an sich"(as such?). But I think you may have misunderstood my use of the word "experience". I am using it to mean the totality of my reality: my sense perceptions, my mind, my thoughts, my emotions, my reasoning etc, literally everything that exists for me. So experience as I am using the word, is not the domain of imagination. It is not the domain of anything, rather everything is the doman of it.

But a philosopher starts from the explored depth of his experience and willingly accesses the world of reason and abstracts to arrive, because he has to arrive, wants it like nothing else, at the foundations of core existence itself, which ultimately cannot be held in mere concepts: it breaks through and permeates the body, mind, soul and experience. Any shortcut using mere experience has to be deception, since our experiences are basically that, left by themselves.

Hopefully my previous paragraph cleared up what I think is a misunderstanding, but just in case: the ideas I explained were arrived at by reasoning(at least partly) and certainly aren't purely due to "mere experience" in the way that you seem to be using that word.

..... as I am trying to convey something that is rather experiential, and introducing myself beforehand would I think tend to water down what I was trying to convey.

You're more like a poet then!

Actually I'm probably closer to anti-poet which is why that second block of text I quoted from you is a bit too flowery for my tastes. Flowery writing makes me suspicious that a person is more interesed in style than substance, which to me is not a good sign for a philosopher.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

... the ideas I explained were arrived at by reasoning (at least partly) and certainly aren't purely due to "mere experience" in the way that you seem to be using that word.

Okay, could you then show some of the reasoning that made you arrive at the idea expressed in your first post? But beware, it might look like justifying something.

Philosophy and enlightenment: what exactly are we trying to justify with them? Reality? What is there to justify? Can't you see it, experience it, feel it? It is all here. This is it. Right now. Everywhere. It is right before your eyes, this is it. This is all.

Maybe instead of 'justifying' the words 'clarifying', 'understanding' or 'enlighten' could be used? My answer would be that most people appear not seeing or experiencing 'it' at all, whatever it is, too many self-contained dust clouds blocking the way.

[sevens]

Jason/Diebert,

Reality is very much everything that your senses experience. But, it is what you do with that constant information that signifies 'enlightenment'. The purpose of philosophy should be to expand and 'clarify' (hone) what your processor is interpreting. That is its purpose: 'clarity', and security.

[Beingof1]

Experience, all experience "an sich" is the domain of our imagination. In this sense it's no different from having a dream or opinion about something. It's the 'pure' world of children and animals, which many people, caught in their mazes of false reasoning, are living indeed too detached from for no good reason at all. But a philosopher starts from the explored depth of his experience and willingly accesses the world of reason and abstracts to arrive, because he has to arrive, wants it like nothing else, at the foundations of core existence itself, which ultimately cannot be held in mere concepts: it breaks through and permeates the body, mind, soul and experience. Any shortcut using mere experience has to be deception, since our experiences are basically that, left by themselves.

Lifting thought and thank you.