My point however revolves more around making that crucial distinction between what one particular sentient being believes “in her head” about ideal forms and ideal facts, and what she is able to demonstrate phenomenally to others is in fact an ideal form or an ideal fact to all sentient human beings who wish to be thought of as rational.
Out in a context that most of us will be familiar with.
How about Don Trump? He is surely a sentient being that all of us here are familiar with.
He wants to build a wall along the Mexican border to keep the illegal aliens out.
Now, the actual building of the wall as a “phenomenon” is embedded in engineering and construction and all those either/or relationships that must be taken into account when projects of this sort are attempted.
But there is also the phenomena revolving around political protests/demonstrations in which flesh and blood human beings from opposite ends of the political spectrum argue that the wall ought to be built or that the wall ought not to be built.
Now, wisdom embedded in the construction of the wall is calculated objectively: the wall is either structurally sound or it is not. The wall is either effective in keeping the illegal aliens out or it is not.
But: what constitutes wisdom when the discussion/debate shifts to whether or not the wall ought to be built?
Let the record show that regardless of who it is, it is still the gentleman who is interested in the question of how they might diatinguish some such from some other, and to satisfy his stated interest in wisdom it is his particular person that must be known to your humble servant.
It never ceases to amaze me how these ponderously “intellectual” folks continue to come up with truly twisted ways in which to wiggle out of bringing their technical skills [and “analysis”] down to earth.
The point here [presumably] is to pin a phenomenon down epistemologically. To capture it in a bunch of words defining and defnding another bunch of words.
I give them a particular. But it’s not the right particular. My particular is flesh and blood. Their particular is anything but.
Or, sure, maybe I’m not broaching the particular here correctly. Why don’t one of you try.
Anything to actually bring the discussion out into the world that we, you know, live in.