The brain is mostly a filter.
-
-
"In short, our nervous system, which enables us to communicate with objects, prevents us, on the other hand, from knowing their nature. It is an organ of relation with the outer world; it is also, for us, a cause of isolation. We never go outside ourselves." - Alfred Binet
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @skyyygazer
The idea that there could be some mode in which we directly converse with anything outside of our mind is fundamentally mistaken. The mind is the only place where experience is possible. You can just shift the focus between different types of models (perceptual vs reflective).
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
The mind is only place *we know of* where experience is possible.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @skyyygazer
If something is not known to you, how can you claim that you experienced it?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
I'm not claiming to have experienced it.. I'm just claiming it exists.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @skyyygazer
You claim that you experience what you don’t experience?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Nope. Obviously, we cant know *for sure* that anything outside the mind exists. Theres no way to prove that. But I think it's a bit naive to think that the only things in existance are the things you can directly experience.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @skyyygazer
The exact meaning of your words is very important when you try to think using language
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
I agree.. but I'm not sure I understand your point here. Did I use a word incorrectly?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The mind is the name for the substrate in which experience is possible. To be experienced, things have to be constructed in the mind, and integrated in a way that makes it possible to remember experiencing them.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz @skyyygazer
Experience is the name for a particular kind of observable: that it is like something to observe. It is not clear if we should ascribe existence to observation (it depends on how we define "exist"), but it does not make sense to propose that unobservable observables exist.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
I see your point, but I dont think it's fair to define experience as strictly observable You can experience emotions, you can experience hardships, etc. Regardless, all this seems to agree with the original quote, no?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 7 more replies
New conversation -
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.