Are You Surprised that You're You?

General philosophy discussions. If you are not sure where to place your thread, please post it here. Share favorite quotes, discuss philosophers, and other topics.

Re: Are You Surprised that You're You?

Postby DragonFly on July 28th, 2018, 8:48 pm 

We’re probably not surprised to be who we are because we’re so familiar with ourselves. We were forced into being and to amount to how we became, never having been responsible.

Replies to others to figure out:

There is nothing magical about ‘quantum’. Field quanta go through two slits because they are wave lumps in the field. Our eyes can detect 3-5 photons, if not 1. A photon is a quantum.

One cannot be dubious about the message of reality; the messenger, which is the implementation, doesn’t matter, for any difference that makes no difference in the message is no difference. We could even say that fields and particles serve to simulate/run our reality, in a way, since they become us.

Evolution is not deniable; it has triple confirmation.
User avatar
DragonFly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2369
Joined: 04 Aug 2012


Re: Are You Surprised that You're You?

Postby Positor on September 1st, 2018, 1:02 am 

iconoclastic » May 30th, 2018, 12:43 am wrote:Your existence is surprising enough (if one of your ancestors had decided they didn't want to have sex that night, you wouldn't exist), but it's even more surprising that you're you: why aren't you someone else? I'm not conscious of being anyone else, so why am I conscious of being me? Does it surprise any of you that the birth of some random person (you) was, well, you? (I'm not asking "why am I who I am and why do I act how I act". That's genetics. I'm asking why I am conscious of being myself, in other words, why am I myself).

You may find the following paper interesting:

http://philpapers.org/archive/KLAWAI-2.pdf

It considers the question in detail, although I must say I am not fully convinced by the conclusion.
Positor
Active Member
 
Posts: 1090
Joined: 05 Feb 2010


Re: Are You Surprised that You're You?

Postby Angelo_Cannata on September 9th, 2018, 1:24 pm 

I read the article of Tim Klaassen.
It seems to me that he falls in the error which everybody falls in when treating this question. The error is considering everything in an objective perspective. There are two things to make clear about this.

First one: talking about subjectivity is only an appearance when the talker does not consider his own subjectivity. In fact, in this case, the talker considers subjectivity as an object being in front of him. So, this is not a real talking about subjectivity. This is talking about an objectified subjectivity.

Second one. It follows, from the first point, that a real talking about subjectivity happens only when the talker considers his own subjectivity. So in this moment, while I am writing these words, I can say that I am really talking about subjectivity only if I talk about my subjectivity. If you want really to talk about subjectivity, you must talk about your subjectivity, not mine.

But this is not enough. Tim Klaassen surely takes into account his own subjectivity along his article. But this is not enough. A really taking into account one’s own subjectivity implies taking into account the total unreliability of our concepts, categories, ideas, just because they are subjective. Usually, at this point people fall in fear, they become scared, they are in a hurry to conclude that this relativism, subjectivism, that gives importance to the unreliability of our ideas, drives us to a total end of any reflection, that is silence, end of philosophy.

This is not true. It is not end of philosophy; it is only end of metaphysics, that is, relying on reality, objectivity, certainty, truth.

So, it is clear now that any reflection about subjectivity must necessarily be conducted in the consciousness of being subjective, that is, moving itself in the realm of opinions, not of objectivity or reality.

Any reflection about subjectivity must move inside subjectivity. Tim Klaassen does not do this: he continues to move his argumentation in a kind of reflection that is based on objectivity.

Subjectivity is subjective. This means that subjectivity cannot be explored by thinking with objective categories. If so, it will reduce itself to useless words and concepts.

But we cannot free ourselves from objectivity, because it is part of our natural thinking. So, the solution is not moving our concepts just among subjective concepts. In this case, we would simply do arts, literature: arts are the reference point of any subjective reflection.

We need to build some dialogue between subjectivity and objectivity, that is, opinion, art, literature, on one side, and our instinct to objectify, on the other side.
Angelo_Cannata
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 6
Joined: 29 Jul 2018


Re: Are You Surprised that You're You?

Postby Positor on September 9th, 2018, 9:21 pm 

Angelo_Cannata » September 9th, 2018, 6:24 pm wrote:First one: talking about subjectivity is only an appearance when the talker does not consider his own subjectivity. In fact, in this case, the talker considers subjectivity as an object being in front of him. So, this is not a real talking about subjectivity. This is talking about an objectified subjectivity.

Second one. It follows, from the first point, that a real talking about subjectivity happens only when the talker considers his own subjectivity. So in this moment, while I am writing these words, I can say that I am really talking about subjectivity only if I talk about my subjectivity. If you want really to talk about subjectivity, you must talk about your subjectivity, not mine.

Yes, it seems to me that phenomenology would provide the best approach to this topic. I wonder if there is anything in Husserl's philosophy that is pertinent here.
Positor
Active Member
 
Posts: 1090
Joined: 05 Feb 2010


Re: Are You Surprised that You're You?

Postby Angelo_Cannata on September 10th, 2018, 3:36 pm 

It seems to me that phenomenology as well is an objective way of dealing with the problem, that is, phenomenology implies the idea of the existence of some reality external to our brain.
Angelo_Cannata
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 6
Joined: 29 Jul 2018


Previous

Return to Anything Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests