Yeah, you're right. It's not a lot, surprisingly. But since confusion is admitted I only still have to explain "additional". It's just that identity and the law of non-contradiction is basic logic while Freud writes mostly about psychological theory and therapy. The discussion if there should be more than one types or forms of philosophy is really a sidetrack. Why are there so many languages, so many levels and personalities, why so many types of confusion, why more than one abstraction method, why more than one way to talk about things? I could go on but that's what I mean by additional confusion: blurring of these issues.chikoka wrote:That was the whole post, i fail to see what " lot of additional, confusing cruft" there was.SeekerOfWisdom wrote:It confuses me that more than one philosophy exists
Freud / Lacan / Zizek
- Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Re: Freud / Lacan / Zizek
-
SeekerOfWisdom
- Posts: 2336
- Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm
Re: Freud / Lacan / Zizek
Like you said Diebert, best to uncollect first, then find the good apples.
To me it seems there aren't any good apples, all apples and thoughts are illusions after all, can we ever believe that our thoughts and conceptualizations of ultimate reality have any relation to ultimate reality? All that we know goes as far as what we "see" and our understanding can't pass it, what one single thing do you know besides that you woke up in the same mystery as me? It can't be described better than it can be experienced
To me it seems there aren't any good apples, all apples and thoughts are illusions after all, can we ever believe that our thoughts and conceptualizations of ultimate reality have any relation to ultimate reality? All that we know goes as far as what we "see" and our understanding can't pass it, what one single thing do you know besides that you woke up in the same mystery as me? It can't be described better than it can be experienced
- Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Re: Freud / Lacan / Zizek
They don't of course. But they might have relation to the illusions and the awareness of why they are being called illusions.SeekerOfWisdom wrote: To me it seems there aren't any good apples, all apples and thoughts are illusions after all, can we ever believe that our thoughts and conceptualizations of ultimate reality have any relation to ultimate reality?
All good and well but the reality is that "we" are born and raised within a shit load of conceptual and cultural processing of things. To brush it all off as illusion doesn't give you any more "ultimate reality" or "mystery" to experience. The illusion lies in attachment and identification with what is not even existing somewhere in reality. But appearing nevertheless, participating nevertheless.All that we know goes as far as what we "see" and our understanding can't pass it, what one single thing do you know besides that you woke up in the same mystery as me? It can't be described better than it can be experienced