James is wrong

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

James is wrong

Postby Ecmandu » Wed May 02, 2018 5:03 pm

In order for something to exist, it must be affected - James central tenet

The dimension of Platonic forms are affected by nothing, they are eternal... the dimension of triangleness will never change, beings hallucinate change from these forms, but never change them.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6936
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: James is wrong

Postby iambiguous » Wed May 02, 2018 5:32 pm

Ecmandu wrote:In order for something to exist, it must be affected - James central tenet


More to the point [perhaps]: Is or is not James affected now?
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 24669
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: James is wrong

Postby Ecmandu » Wed May 02, 2018 5:34 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:In order for something to exist, it must be affected - James central tenet


More to the point [perhaps]: Is or is not James affected now?


My point is that there are existentents that we know exist and are not affected by anything
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6936
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: James is wrong

Postby Jakob » Wed May 02, 2018 8:20 pm

Ecmandu wrote:In order for something to exist, it must be affected - James central tenet

The dimension of Platonic forms are affected by nothing, they are eternal... the dimension of triangleness will never change, beings hallucinate change from these forms, but never change them.

James claims the inverse. That to exist, something must affect.
Thus, existence = "affectance".

And those Platonic forms do affect, for example, you into writing about them.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: James is wrong

Postby iambiguous » Wed May 02, 2018 8:44 pm

Jakob wrote:James claims the inverse. That to exist, something must affect.


Well, if that's the case, is or is not James affecting now?

Or, for that matter, is or is not Plato?
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 24669
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: James is wrong

Postby Jakob » Wed May 02, 2018 8:50 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Jakob wrote:James claims the inverse. That to exist, something must affect.


Well, if that's the case, is or is not James affecting now?

Or, for that matter, is or is not Plato?

We are talking about both, so Id say that the answer according to RM must be positive in both cases.

When a star affects us with its light, that is if we observe it, it may not actually be a star anymore, since its light departed millions of years ago and the actual object may have ceased to exist. Or does it still exists, just because we observe it?
Last edited by Jakob on Wed May 02, 2018 8:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: James is wrong

Postby Ecmandu » Wed May 02, 2018 8:51 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Jakob wrote:James claims the inverse. That to exist, something must affect.


Well, if that's the case, is or is not James affecting now?

Or, for that matter, is or is not Plato?


are we affecting triangles? The dimension in which triangleness exists? When it comes to people? Are we affecting "jamesness"? The dimension of the eternal platonic form of James? Not sure. But I do know that we are not affecting the Platonic forms of walkingness, or triangleness. In that sense, James is provably wrong.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6936
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: James is wrong

Postby Jakob » Wed May 02, 2018 8:53 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Jakob wrote:James claims the inverse. That to exist, something must affect.


Well, if that's the case, is or is not James affecting now?

Or, for that matter, is or is not Plato?


are we affecting triangles? The dimension in which triangleness exists? When it comes to people? Are we affecting "jamesness"? The dimension of the eternal platonic form of James? Not sure. But I do know that we are not affecting the Platonic forms of walkingness, or triangleness. In that sense, James is provably wrong.

You didn't pay attention; RM says something exists if it affects, not if it is affected.
The devil is in the details 8)
as James would say.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: James is wrong

Postby Ecmandu » Wed May 02, 2018 9:00 pm

Jakob wrote:You didn't pay attention; RM says something exists if it affects, not if it is affected.
The devil is in the details 8)
as James would say.
[/quote]

So everything only affects but nothing is affected?
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6936
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: James is wrong

Postby surreptitious75 » Thu May 03, 2018 7:28 am

Everything is affected by something because nothing physical exists in absolute isolation to everything else
Entropy is occurring all the time within the Universe even if it is happening too slow to actually be noticed
In order for something not to be affected at all then it would have to exist in a spaceless and timeless void
A spaceless and timeless void by definition cannot exist and so everything is affected well as affecting also
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: James is wrong

Postby Meno_ » Thu May 03, 2018 8:11 am

But Platonic forms do exist in a spaceless timelessness void, so it affects, but what is it effected by? Our thoughts about them? That is not how forms are defined, either..
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3122
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: James is wrong

Postby surreptitious75 » Thu May 03, 2018 11:39 am

Platonic forms are imagined by the brain which is a physical organ and physical organs exist in space and time. The most famous Platonic forms are numbers but they cannot be known to exist as an abstract concept unless the brain first conceives of them. So if something exists but the brain does not know it exists and cannot even imagine it existing then it cannot be known. As all knowledge and understanding including that of abstract concepts like Platonic forms has to come through the brain
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: James is wrong

Postby Meno_ » Thu May 03, 2018 4:57 pm

That is the paradox, which came first . The argument for forms goes reversely, they were not conceived by us mere mortals.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3122
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: James is wrong

Postby iambiguous » Fri May 04, 2018 6:47 pm

Jakob wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Jakob wrote:James claims the inverse. That to exist, something must affect.


Well, if that's the case, is or is not James affecting now?

Or, for that matter, is or is not Plato?

We are talking about both, so Id say that the answer according to RM must be positive in both cases.


Theoretically, in other words.

Jakob wrote: When a star affects us with its light, that is if we observe it, it may not actually be a star anymore, since its light departed millions of years ago and the actual object may have ceased to exist. Or does it still exists, just because we observe it?


Well put.

Just as, in a sense, long after Adolph Hitler is dead and gone, he is still affecting any number of Nazis still around today.

And we don't even know for certain that one or another manifestion of his own particular "I" --- what some call the soul --- isn't still around somewhere.

Up there? Down there? In limbo?

That gap between what we think we know about these things here and now and all that would need to be known in order to demonstrate that all others ought to believe the same.

So, it seems true that both James and Plato are still affecting. We just have no way in which to calculate that their continuing narratives reflect that which all rational men and women ought to embrace in turn.

Or, rather, so it seems to me.

And that's before we get to the is/right world and all the problematic stuff I broach.

On the other hand, I don't know for certain yet if James is himself "dead and gone".

Whatever that means.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 24669
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: James is wrong

Postby surreptitious75 » Sat May 05, 2018 8:39 am

Death is a transition from consciousness to non consciousness rather than from existence to non existence because when the body dies it still exists in physical form
And all the sub atomic particles it is composed of will carry on existing long after it has died since they have the longest known life span of anything in the Universe
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: James is wrong

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sat May 05, 2018 5:36 pm

In James model...
Hitler, the dead far away star, and Plato all affected when they existed. The effects of what they affected continued through time and affect us now.
This does not entail they exist now. The photons from the distant star exist. The ideas and events affected by Hitler and Plato live on in chains of effects affecting other effects, and these effects have included the use of the names. So the names continue.
This does not mean they exist now.
Karpel Tunnel
 
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: James is wrong

Postby iambiguous » Mon May 07, 2018 7:49 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:Everything is affected by something because nothing physical exists in absolute isolation to everything else
Entropy is occurring all the time within the Universe even if it is happening too slow to actually be noticed
In order for something not to be affected at all then it would have to exist in a spaceless and timeless void
A spaceless and timeless void by definition cannot exist and so everything is affected well as affecting also


Consider:

The basic rule of thumb is that “affect” is almost always a verb and “effect” is usually a noun.

How then does James -- re RM/AO -- make his own distinction here?

Also, going all the way back to that which brought into existence Existence itself, how would this distinction then have been encompassed?

My guess: We'll never know.

Where James and I always went off the rail however revolved around my distinction between affectance in the either/or world and affectance in the is/ought world.

We know for example that, given the objective nature of human biology [rooted in the evolution of life on earth], sex, pregnancy and abortion are intertwined in very particular ways when humans interact.

But what happens when these interactions come to effect our behaviors such that we choose conflicting moral narratives in reacting to these behaviors as either right or wrong.

And how on earth this intertwined in his understanding of the Real God?

Explored in a way not ever always up in the scholastic clouds.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 24669
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: James is wrong

Postby iambiguous » Mon May 07, 2018 7:54 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:Death is a transition from consciousness to non consciousness rather than from existence to non existence because when the body dies it still exists in physical form
And all the sub atomic particles it is composed of will carry on existing long after it has died since they have the longest known life span of anything in the Universe


Maybe.

But how exactly would one go about demonstrating it?

And, of far greater importance to folks like me, what becomes the fate of "I" in all this?
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 24669
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: James is right

Postby Mithus » Mon May 07, 2018 9:20 pm

iambiguous wrote:Consider:
The basic rule of thumb is that “affect” is almost always a verb and “effect” is usually a noun.
How then does James -- re RM/AO -- make his own distinction here?


JSS Definitions:
Affect = n. Action upon, v. to Act upon. The Act of causing change.
Effect = n. End result, v. to produce an End result. The End result of causing change.
..... panta rhei .............................................
User avatar
Mithus
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:05 pm

Re: James is wrong

Postby Meno_ » Mon May 07, 2018 9:56 pm

Just because ' the always' leaves the - not always, or, seldom, does not exclude it.

Therefore, James is nominally-actually wrong, but patently expressly -potentially right.

So he must be beyond judgement.
Last edited by Meno_ on Tue May 08, 2018 6:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3122
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: James is wrong

Postby Ecmandu » Mon May 07, 2018 9:59 pm

Mithus wrote:
iambiguous wrote:Consider:
The basic rule of thumb is that “affect” is almost always a verb and “effect” is usually a noun.
How then does James -- re RM/AO -- make his own distinction here?


JSS Definitions:
Affect = n. Action upon, v. to Act upon. The Act of causing change.
Effect = n. End result, v. to produce an End result. The End result of causing change.


So everything "acts upon" but nothing is acted upon?
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6936
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Affect

Postby Mithus » Mon May 07, 2018 10:24 pm

Ecmandu wrote:So everything "acts upon" but nothing is acted upon?


James S Saint wrote:
A potential-to-Affect is a situation or circumstance. And an "affect", is an occurrence of potentials changing, or situations changing. An affect is a changing.
The potential that brings an affect is the situation of all surrounding affects. Every affect, affects its own surroundings as it is simultaneously affected by those surroundings. It is a give-and-take occurrence. Thus the "surroundings" constitute the "potential-to-affect", PtA. And the "affect" is the result of the PtA.
..... panta rhei .............................................
User avatar
Mithus
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:05 pm

Re: James is wrong

Postby surreptitious75 » Tue May 08, 2018 2:09 am

iambiguous wrote:
surreptitious75 wrote:
Death is a transition from consciousness to non consciousness rather than from existence to non existence because when the body dies it still exists in physical form
And all the sub atomic particles it is composed of will carry on existing long after it has died since they have the longest known life span of anything in the Universe

But how exactly would one go about demonstrating it
And of far greater importance to folks like me what becomes the fate of I in all this

Physics knows the lifespan of sub atomic particles with remarkable accuracy

The I that is you will slowly start to disintegrate after death unless you are frozen in which case you will survive in physical form as long as the temperature remains
below a certain point. A body that is cremated will disintegrate more so than one that is buried but your physical form will disintegrate regardless of type of funeral

I saw an autopsy on television last week. There was no blood as it is all drained out in advance. The body had not disintegrated that much after death and it was
cut with a single incision from throat to pelvis. Most of the organs were removed for examination then the body was baseball stitched and put back in the freezer
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Affect re: James is wrong

Postby Ecmandu » Tue May 08, 2018 3:05 am

Mithus wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:So everything "acts upon" but nothing is acted upon?


James S Saint wrote:
A potential-to-Affect is a situation or circumstance. And an "affect", is an occurrence of potentials changing, or situations changing. An affect is a changing.
The potential that brings an affect is the situation of all surrounding affects. Every affect, affects its own surroundings as it is simultaneously affected by those surroundings. It is a give-and-take occurrence. Thus the "surroundings" constitute the "potential-to-affect", PtA. And the "affect" is the result of the PtA.


Well. You and Jakob need to compare notes, because platonic forms are not affected.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6936
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Affect

Postby Mithus » Tue May 08, 2018 10:57 am

You had this discussion with James before. At that time you stated that you never saw evidence of platonic forms, that every concept you can think of can only co-exist with the material.

This is what James answered:
I believe that there is a singular reason for existence. That singular reason is a "divine being" in the same sense that a perfect circle is a "Platonic form". It is not supposed to be a physical being, but a conceptual being; a logic, a reason, a because.
That reason "exists" (as a reason, a divine being) in all places, omnipresent. That reason cannot be thwarted or resisted by anything, thus is omnipotent. That reason accounts for all things, thus is omniscient.


And from another thread:
In RM:AO, I chose, for convenience, to merely allow for a "conceptual realm of existence" and a "physical realm of existence". The conceptual realm was for the Platonic entities - concepts, independent of physical existence. Plato and others declared in their ontology, that such entities have "always existed". I don't really care if you choose to say that they have "always existed" or not. If a concept is not being physically represented, it is having no affect. It can be thought of as a "potential existence void of opportunity".

The conceptual realm is actually the special case of the physical realm wherein the essence of something (its concept) has been reduced to zero physical presence, yet the concept still "exists". The conceptual realm is the extreme pole of reduced physicality.
..... panta rhei .............................................
User avatar
Mithus
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:05 pm

Next

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users