Ex. when a red dot is registered on your retina, it doesn't tell you anything about itself, to say otherwise it's just the myth of categorial given (Sellars). You need to have the concept of red to plug that new sensation in. For X to be read, it means it's not white or blue.
-
-
Yes but these sets of relations cannot be put inside an absolute container (welt). they are the welt. there must occur a sensory-register for them to even produce a shade-concept. so, when you require a new organ, the milieu changes into something witing to become-world.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
No welt is just the set of the transcendental conditions you have, at the top of which is language. To embark on world making requires something more than just new organs. Sensory registers are just Aristotelian tode-ti (this sucres, stuff).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @lesoiseauxdumal and
Tode-ties by themselves don't give you anything novel because they are not by themselves capable of revealing a new structure, a new world.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
true enough. but can there be a world without any tode-ti? isn't the transcendental conditions already a matter of "sensory organs"? any assemblage of sensors can have a different "world" from the other one.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @lesoiseauxdumal @NegarestaniReza and
the universal then must be something that makes the assemblages possible in so many ways, not just what the self-reflecting assemblage builds out of the "chaos".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This is the whole point. The universal without the local is as meaningless as talking about wholes and parts. These are not fundamental ontological categories, they are epistemological which means they can shift. We should reclaim the universal precisely though such shifts.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
How to put the mereology nuts in their place in one tweet.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
To be honest the problem is not metrology, it is a subset of a much larger problem, the so-called metaphors of levels. Check Carl Craver's essay Levels for a good introduction.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Merci.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
As early as the mid-90s some mereologistz began to see the cracks (varzi and cassetti for example). It's just they were working in a very traditional framework and they were unaware of broader logical and epistemological problems.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.