The World Beyond BetterMost > Anything Goes

A Conversation With Daniel

<< < (4/6) > >>

injest:
I kilt the conversation thread!!  :( :'(

Daniel:
yes hello everyone.  my computer did go down..... i just now got it to start working again.

the keyboard does not work though, so will still need to have it repaired... :(

am using the on-screen keyboard right now... slow going - but better than none.

Daniel:
Scott: Tangents are alright in this thread... we can always scroll back up and see what we were originally talking about.

Chris: I find it interesting that you used an example of psychological science to question meaning and purpose.  But as to science having anything to do with meaning, the short answer is this... It doesn't. The long answer: Costructed awareness (facts) does not always trump experiencial knowledge. It seems as though working from a basis of experiencial awareness is more flexible than working with facts... Likewise, experiencial knowledge does not always trump nonexperiencial knowledge. If we have seen nothing else as a result of our species evolution, I hope we acknowledge that diversity depends on flexibility, and that noodiversity is as important as biodiversity. I wll come to your other questions and example a little later... This feels like I am doing a crossword puzzle, putting in one letter at a time.

Jess: What you are describing is the type of cause/effect relationship science seeks to understand. For the most part, it is successful... but there are stll X/Y events where science has not yet proven cause, only correlations.

Aussie Chris:
Daniel.  About the only thing I understood in your explanation was this:


--- Quote from: Daniel on August 05, 2007, 09:07:22 am ---But as to science having anything to do with meaning, the short answer is this... It doesn't.
--- End quote ---

I'd like to think that I am reasonably intelligent, but I've not done university psychology so I'm unfamiliar with your terminology.  Could you please explain: Costructed awareness (facts), experiencial knowledge, nonexperiencial knowledge, and noodiversity?

Daniel:
Chris:

Most of the terms I use are made up on the spot - usually combining two concepts to create another one.

Constructed Awareness: A specific thought form or pattern that is drilled into us at a very young age and which we always believe to be true and logically sound. These are the thoughts we recognize as being real without having to think it out.  (i.e. 2+2=4... the fire truck is red...etc.) These awarenesses are already constructed when we mentally register them, so there is no specific act of cognition or process of knowledge.

Experiencial knowledge: Knowledge based on personal experience or observation of events.  (i.e. This is a shortcut... It is easier to do it this way... If you thrust your hand through a pane of glass, it will hurt and bleed in thus manner.)

Nonexperiencial knowledge: Knowledge based on some other reality than factual awareness or experience, usually intuitive or deeply emotional in nature. (i.e. I feel like we should go this way... It feels like I'm doing this wrong for some reason... This doesn't seem right.)

Noodiversity: This is a word I invented based on the idea of noontological evolution, I think perhaps it should be noontodiversity. Either way, it refers to the growth in amount and variety between various modes or styles of consciousness, much like biodiversity references variety among lifeforms.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page