4 ms·
So close, but just misses the mark. This statement contradicts itself: > We can assume that an objective reality exists, as "das Ding an sich" (the-thing-in-i
by blueprint 9y ago
So close, but just misses the mark.
This statement contradicts itself:
> We can assume that an objective reality exists, as "das Ding an sich" (the-thing-in-itself) in the pholisophy of Kant, but our perception of that reality will always be subjective.
in that the latter clause is an objective statement about perception necessarily, by its assumption, derived through said limited subjective means.
"Do not rely on your thinking in order to know the world"
- danielam 9y agoYes, I read that passage and was left irritated by the philosophical mediocrity of it. Name-dropping Kant only makes matters worse given that his conceptualism is incoherent. The subjective/objective distinction is problematic. Obviously, knowing agents are always subjects -- something has to be doing the knowing -- but knowledge of that presupposes that the subject is able to know the world as it is in the first place.
- blueprint 9y agoAll subjects exist in their environment. Their own individual truths are unique just as they are. Suppose you look through a bucket of polluted water. It's difficult to see through it. Heck, it's difficult to tell what's even IN the bucket because the water is murky. If the water is clean, and you shine a light into it, then, things in it are visible. The analogy is to the degree of truthfulness of an individual's consciousness. The higher the truthfulness, the higher the degree of precision with which they can make confirmations about what exists as it is.