'(·) on Twitter: "@devinhalladay object-oriented approaches are useful when dealing with consensus reality because they map neatly to symbols. Symbolic thought and language are natural tools for negotiating the contents of consensus reality. But they fail when it comes to the contents of minds" / Twitter

You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more

'(·)

@allgebrah

Dec 4, 2018

Replying to

@theflowingsky

and

@devinhalladay

been thinking in a similar direction recently, coming from dissatisfaction with object-oriented approaches to qualia - qualia are not objects, they lack critical properties of objects, e.g. permanence

1

Replying to

and

object-oriented approaches are useful when dealing with consensus reality because they map neatly to symbols. Symbolic thought and language are natural tools for negotiating the contents of consensus reality. But they fail when it comes to the contents of minds

1:09 AM · Dec 4, 2018Twitter Web Client

Replying to

and

whatever happens in (at least) a human mind is grounded in experience, and through that in the body and its agency, so yeah, the best ontology for one's mind's contents is going to be body-oriented

1

Replying to

and

throwing out object-oriented ontology altogether seems unwise though, body-oriented ontology is bad at establishing consensus since people feel very differently, it's a right-tool-for-the-job situation

1

Show replies

Conversation