3 ms·

“Cogito ergo sum.” There is, by nature of anything existing at all, definitionally some objective reality.

didibus 5y ago
Descartes take is refuted by almost all philosophers that followed him, because it's just not a convincing argument. > The problem with Descartes’ standard for knowledge is that almost no beliefs meet it. Descartes thought he could show how our ordinary knowledge claims are ultimately based on the Cogito, but most philosophers have not been convinced by his case -- https://1000wordphilosophy.com/2018/11/26/descartes-i-think-therefore-i-am/ https://1000wordphilosophy.com/2018/11/26/descartes-i-think-... Now I don't deny the existence of a reality, I'm not saying everything is an illusion and we're not even real. I'm saying that reality need not be a constant, which would mean that truth can be a moving target, as it can change in time and space. And then I'm saying that irregardless of if that reality (or ground truth let's call it) is constant or ever changing, when we humans explain that truth, we are always simply modeling our understanding of it for practical purposes. Our search for truth itself is driven by this practical drive, understanding of the ground truth is researched in order to better predict the future or act upon our environment to create the future we'd prefer. If you instead think of our explained truths as the absolute ground truth, you are entering the world of human dogma and beliefs, that is a world of personal opinion, with no way to argue or debate anything, its only practical benefits are seeking comfort and/or power. For me, this was a big "haha" moment. I realized that the opposite of dogma is pragma. Your claim to the truth are useless, and in many cases harmful dogmas. It's much better to focus on practicalities that one model has over another. Most people's "truths" have glaring flaws anyways, that doesn't always invalidate their practicalities though, and that matters much more in the end. > If you're pragmatic, you're practical. You're living in the real world, wearing comfortable shoes. If you're dogmatic, you follow the rules. You're living in the world you want, and acting a little stuck up about it -- https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/pragmatic-dogmatic/ https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/pragmati...

Descartes take is refuted by almost all philosophers that followed him, because it's just not a convincing argument. > The problem with Descartes’ standard for knowledge is that almost no beliefs meet it. Descartes thought he could show how our ordinary knowledge claims are ultimately based on the Cogito, but most philosophers have not been convinced by his case -- https://1000wordphilosophy.com/2018/11/26/descartes-i-think-therefore-i-am/ https://1000wordphilosophy.com/2018/11/26/descartes-i-think-... Now I don't deny the existence of a reality, I'm not saying everything is an illusion and we're not even real. I'm saying that reality need not be a constant, which would mean that truth can be a moving target, as it can change in time and space. And then I'm saying that irregardless of if that reality (or ground truth let's call it) is constant or ever changing, when we humans explain that truth, we are always simply modeling our understanding of it for practical purposes. Our search for truth itself is driven by this practical drive, understanding of the ground truth is researched in order to better predict the future or act upon our environment to create the future we'd prefer. If you instead think of our explained truths as the absolute ground truth, you are entering the world of human dogma and beliefs, that is a world of personal opinion, with no way to argue or debate anything, its only practical benefits are seeking comfort and/or power. For me, this was a big "haha" moment. I realized that the opposite of dogma is pragma. Your claim to the truth are useless, and in many cases harmful dogmas. It's much better to focus on practicalities that one model has over another. Most people's "truths" have glaring flaws anyways, that doesn't always invalidate their practicalities though, and that matters much more in the end. > If you're pragmatic, you're practical. You're living in the real world, wearing comfortable shoes. If you're dogmatic, you follow the rules. You're living in the world you want, and acting a little stuck up about it -- https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/pragmatic-dogmatic/ https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/pragmati...