How did I know that this would be his response?
.
Okay, you pick it then. 
Probably for the same reason I knew that you wouldn’t provide one.
Unless you want to go back to Communism again. 
We’ll need a context, of course.
Well, my point is that in regard to “I” at the existential intersection of identity, value judgments, conflicting goods and political power, any context will do.
Here “I” am fractured and fragmented given the points I raise about human interactions in my signature threads.
All I can then do is to note the arguments of those who construe themselves instead as moral and political objectivists. In either a God or a No God world. How in their interactions with others [in which their own value judgments come into conflict] are they not fractured and fragmented.
Or, with KT, embedded in his own rendition of pragmatism, how does he not seem nearly as fractured and fragmented as I have thought myself into “feeling” here and now?
But either way, I would prefer that others choose the context. One that is of particular importance to them. One they have a stake in such that they will dive down deep into it in defending their own point of view.
A “depth of conviction” I am no longer able to embody myself. But one I clearly remember given all the years that I was myself a passionate objectivist.
KT asked what this means in concrete, day to day, down to earth terms. And you didn’t answer.
Are you indecisive? Do you delay decisions? Do you seek out more and more information? Do you change your mind after the fact? Do you try to reverse your actions?
What are the manifestations of this fragmentation?
Yes.
But that is derived in large part from this…
If I am always of the opinion that 1] my own values are rooted in dasein and 2] that there are no objective values “I” can reach, then every time I make one particular moral/political leap, I am admitting that I might have gone in the other direction…or that I might just as well have gone in the other direction. Then “I” begins to fracture and fragment to the point there is nothing able to actually keep it all together. At least not with respect to choosing sides morally and politically.
There is how this resonates with me [subjectively/subunctively] “here and now” at the existential intersection of identity, value judgments and political economy; and how I once felt as an objectivist – God/No God – myself. No longer being able to think myself into feeling a “real me” in sync with “the right thing to do”. Always being drawn and quartered in confronting reasonable arguments able to be made by both sides – by many sides – given any particular issue. Recognizing just how thin the line can be between moral nihilism and living one’s life wholly in sync with that which is deemed [existentially[ to be in one’s own selfish interest.
Beyond that, this can only be more fully explored in a discussion of our reactions to a particular context in which behaviors come into conflict over our understanding of how identity, values and political power are intertwined in our own particular “I”.
in this matter, I stand wholly with Iambiguous…
we answer our own questions with language that we
have grown up with or have adapted over the years…
but our answers may not be your answers… and there is the
rub…
we ask questions and sometimes the answers we get, don’t
fit into our own understanding of the question…
we often expect others to answers questions with the same
language or the same way as we would answer the same question…
and this is simply not true…
Iam is answering his questions with his understanding, with his
language and it might not be the way you would answer it,
nor the way I would answer it, but that doesn’t invalidate
his answer…….
we, each of us, understand and see things differently…
either from our childhood indoctrinations and/or
from our experiences we have as we have gotten
older… my answers at 61 is vastly different then my
answers at 21 or 31 or even 51… I am a different person
because I exists in a different place now……
at 51, retirement wasn’t a thing… at 61, retirement looms
large in my life… but seeing how my 401K plan has
gone to nothing, I don’t have much to retire on anymore anyhow…
but hay, that is the way the game is played…
each of us ask different questions and we answer them differently…
because of our education, upbringing, experiences and environment…
my questions and answers are different then your questions and answers…
I am as much a “victim” of my past as you are…
the questions becomes… how do we overcome our indoctrinations
and upbringing and experiences and environment… to become who
we are… to become the people that is possible for us to become…
to find our possibilities as human beings and then become those
possibilities… but in your path, your answers, your questions
the idea of exploring one’s possibilities might never even occur to
you… and all I am doing is making you aware that possibilities
exist for you and for me…
and in the language of Iam… he too is exploring his possibilities…
he is just saying it in a different way and we must try to hear him
as we must try to hear you…….his message isn’t your message
and that is ok…does his message have value?
Yes, yes it does… all we have to do is listen…
and take it seriously…
Kropotkin
This is off-topic. If you don’t want to answer my question, fine. But this is not yet another place for people to satisfy your criteria and answer your questions.
I am asking you to bring…
down to earth.
I have seen you refer to abstract scenarios relating to a number of conflicing good situations. What I am asking for here is to find out how this fracturedness and fragmentation arises in a specfic day. Preferably today or yesterday.
After you wake up, how do you notice this F & F state of mind/self? What triggers it? What do you do about it? What concrete situation does it relate to? You hear something on the news? You get a letter from a friend? What exactly happens?
Actually I asked Iambiguous to answer a question using the criteria he asks of us. I really don’t know how you could possibly have missed that after years of each of you participating in the same forum AND you are coming to his defense. He often chastizes people for being abstract, for not being concrete, for not ‘bringing things down to earth’. I am now asking for him to explain this fragmentedness and fracturedness he experiences in the concrete. How does this arise in his day.
Apart from the fairness of this - since he is hypercritical of precisely the kind of language he is using here - it is also a genuine question on my part. What is he talking about?
Nothing you wrote here has anything to do with the request I made in the OP, nor does it show any understanding of Iambiguous’s OWN criteria for clear communication.
AGain this is precisely ‘serious philosophy’ talk, extremely abstract, up in the clouds.
You don’t need someone else’s position on an issue, in fact it is irrelevent to my question. This thread is not about contrasting views of some good.
I am asking you to present how your fracturedness and fragmentedness arises in a specific day. Some other person’s issue
IS
COMPLETELY
IRRELEVENT.
And Peter, I should add…
Notice that he continues to assume the idea of fracturedness and fragmentedness is coherent and clear and asks others including me to explain why we are not as fragmented and fractured as he is.
In order to give us a chance to do something like that - in another thread where it would be on topic -
doesn’t it make sense that he try to clarify what that means in experiential terms?
Or are we just supposed to make up stuff guessing at what his extremely abstract formulation refers to?
What the heck are you defending?
You’re actually getting in the way of his project.
K: as you have made several post, I shall answer in one… in the post you referenced,
I did in fact answer your question and, and spoke clearly about the answer
IAM wrote…
To IAM, the language he uses is his language and his understanding of his
experiences…he has explained it as best he can with that language
and his understanding…he has answered your question, but with
a language and understanding that you don’t understand…
an example of this can be taken from my life in two parts…
I am hearing impaired… I was born with a severe hearing loss…
so, I say to you, I am hearing impaired… now you might think
that you know what it means, but trust me, you don’t…
for me, it is clear and understandable because I have lived it
all my life… I cannot reduce it down anymore for it to make sense
to you…to a hearing person, life has certain basic fundamental
experiences, but to a hearing impaired person, I don’t have those
basic fundamental experiences and thus, I cannot know what you mean,
no matter how you describe it…and no matter what language you use…
I simply don’t have the knowledge or experience to know what you are talking
about and you cannot know what I am talking about in regards to my hearing loss…
that experience of a hearing loss cannot, cannot be reduced to some basic
level of understanding that can be communicated to others… it must
be experienced to be understood…
IAM has a certain understanding of the world based upon his
knowledge, experiences, both practical and theoretical…
he has explained it as best he can with the language and experiences
he has…if you don’t understand, that isn’t his fault… you don’t
have his language or experiences to understand his issues…
just as you don’t have the language or experiences to understand
what it means to be hearing impaired…you cannot possible know…
we human have certain experiences that allow us to be able
understand each other… we, each of us, have needs that everyone
has and we can understand each other based on everyone having those
needs…but what if we don’t have certain common experiences…
how does one explain to another that doesn’t have the same experiences?
for example, a soldier can try to explain to me, a firefight he
had in Iraq with the Taliban soldiers… I have no experiences
with guns or being in a gun battle… no matter what words he
uses, no matter how basic he gets, how down to earth he gets,
I will never grasp what he is talking about because I cannot
ever experience that…
experiences and knowledge are, personal… they are unique to each of
us… sometimes we can explain those experiences and knowledge
because they are experiences and knowledge available to everyone…
being hungry, wanting love, having dreams, needing safety/security…
everyone on planet earth has these needs and these experiences…
I can explain that to anyone and they will get it…
but how do I explain my hearing loss and have them understand it?
To IAM, what he is saying is quite clear and obvious, to us, it isn’t
because we don’t have his experiences or knowledge or his language…
he has brought it down to earth as best he can given his
experiences and knowledge…… sometimes, sometimes
we just don’t have the language, experience or knowledge
to know what others are talking about…
Kropotkin
I understand it, to the extent I understand it at the extremely abstract level it is presented. IOW where all sorts of misunderstandings may lie. I know his philosophical position probably better than most people here and I understand how he uses the terms he uses. What I specifically was asking for was how his experience, the one abstractly described, arises in a specific day, and also what he actually experiences.
Of course you could explain this more clearly to me, in precisely the ways Iamb could.
Of course I will not know what it is to be hearing impaired as someone who is impaired will be.
However, let’s draw an exact parallel. The exact parallel with my request to iamb would be to ask you to give a specific example of how this came up in a specific interaction with another person. Did it come up today? In what context? Do you happen to know what you missed due to the impairment? How does it feel emotionally when you encounter a problem due to this? What steps do you take to minimize the negative effects - not in general, but in a specific recent situation?
Those are all things you could do. Does this mean I will have the same understanding of each of your experiences you have? Obviously not. Can my understanding be increased regarding the effects, the feelings around the issue, what (in his case) triggers this feeling of being fractured and fragmented? Around what steps you take in reaction to situations where the impairment might have more important problematic effects?
Yes.
Could you tell me for example what aspects of other people’s speech or other sounds are affected? What problems arise from this? Could you tell me, for example, that background noise is a key factor in you missing things? or that it is nto, that some other facets of the situation lead to increasing the problems of the impairment?
Yes, you could. Perhaps those questions are not the best ones, but there is absolutely no possibility that I cannot come to a greater understanding of the specifics of your impairment via dialogue. All I know now is that you have an impairment. Could I learn more? Obviously.
Would I know what it is like on the inside? No.
But that’s a binary response on your part. Since I cannot come to know what it would be like on the inside, I cannot learn anything more and/or you are incapable of communicating more, just as Iamb is.
Bullshit.
And what he wrote was not an answer to my question, it was a repetition of his philosophy, a short version. I didn’t ask him for that. Who would need to? I could find that summary literally in hundreds of posts. No part of it tries to answer my questions. He’s perfectly capable of trying. He is under no obligation to do that of course. Though it’s hypocritical since he demands it of others.
.
You have no way of knowing this. You are assuming he has tried. You are assuming as a third party that you know what can and cannot be communicated by Iamb. For precisely the same reasons you are raising, you cannot possibly draw this conclusion.
I know people both with hearing impairments and others with depression, anxiety, depersonalized states and much more. And all of them are capable of going into concrete details that will give more information.
You like the person you are defending are making something binary. Of course he could give more information about the specific details in concrete instances…
And guess what Peter, that’s what he demands of his readers. I am only asking him to do what he 1) asks everyone else to do and 2) chastizes them, in various insulting ways, if they do not do it.
Precisely the type of distanced academic language he is using is the kind of thing he tells others they are using to, for example, soothe themselves with existential contraptions.
You cannot know what would happen if he actually tried to answer the question. What he did was post something using the same descriptions he has for years. And it was not an answer to my question. It was not an attempt to answer them. It did not in any way try to describe a concrete specific instance.
I’ve read your opinion. I notice what you keep not responding to. I notice you cannot admit for a second that some of the context of the questioning is such that you are in a poor position to judge. I notice that you claim to know what can and cannot be communicated, despite your own position implying you can’t be sure at all what might be accomplished if he answered the questions I posed.
Your out of your depth.
Fascinating the reactions here.
instead of a point by point rebuttal, I shall answer as best
I can from the bottom to the top…
I notice you ended your post with an insult,
“your out of your depth” but in fact, you are making
an assumption…based on your knowledge and
experiences…
I too have read IAM and I actually, as much as I can,
do understand where he is coming from and I believe
he has already answered your question…when he write
about Mary and John and abortions, he is quite plainly
giving concrete examples of where he was and where he is now…
he writes about “Dasein” which in German means “being there”
or “presence” and is translated into English as “existence”
in his “existence” or being, he has certain experiences which
allow him or give him or show him, his relationship with
“Being” or “existence”……he says he is “fragmented”
in regards to “Dasein” or existence…how does one make
this any more plain?
my “reality” or my “being” or my “existence” doesn’t have this
“fragmentation” and thus I do not experience it the way he does…
have I been “fragmented” in my past? yes, I suffer through
some bad years of being “fragmented”… but I worked through them
and I have reclaimed who I am…is my idea of “fragmentation” the
same as IAM? I can’t say as we experience it, understand it differently…
and I don’t have the language to make it clear what I went through
when I was dealing with my “fragmentation”…
to give an example of this, let us say, I explain what it means to
you about being hearing impaired… you might be able to understand
it on an intellectual basis, but that doesn’t mean you actually know
or understand what it means to be hearing impaired…
language cannot give us any type of clear explanation of experiences…
I say to you, I have been married for over 24 years,… you might understand
it, sorta of, because you may have been married for 5 years, but you don’t
really understand what it means to be married for 24 years until you have been
married for 24 years… language itself will not be able to make you understand
what it means to be married for so long…
you have far more faith in language then I do… I don’t believe that the use
of language will be able to explain what it means to be hearing impaired or
to be married for 24 years or to be “Fragmented” in the face of existence…
we believe that by the use of language, we can “understand” what others
are thinking and feeling, but language is a very poor substitute for
understanding because language is not really able to reveal experience…
so, I say, I am in love… you can guess what that means, but you can’t
really know what my experience or understanding of love is because love
isn’t outside of us, it is inside of us… love is an experience and
words, mere words cannot adequately explain the emotion of love…
I can give you examples until the cows come home, but you still won’t
be able to understand what love means to me because you have your
own understanding, your own experiences of love and the two cannot ever
be shared…
words, I would submit aren’t actually a very good way to share what it
means to be human because the same word to both of us may mean
quite different things… you want clarification on what it means to
IAM to be “fragmented” and yet, by mere language, he cannot ever
really describe what it means to him to be “fragmented”… because
words aren’t really able to give a true “representation” of what it
to be “fragmented” in the face of existence…
just as I can give examples of what it means to be hearing impaired
and yet, it won’t actually allow you to know what it means
to be hearing impaired by words… the only knowledge of
being hearing impaired that will allow you to understand is to
be hearing impaired…words themselves won’t give you any
understanding or knowledge of what it means to be hearing
impaired…
the difficulty in existence is all we have are words to describe
existence and words mean different things to different people…
Kropotkin
I once asked Biggus to go into the details of what happened with John and Mary and how it turned out in the end. He didn’t elaborate.
Even that example is oddly abstract.
K: and why should he explain a clearly painful event with you?
I have moments, events and people that I haven’t even shared with my wife…
for whatever reason…and I don’t intend to ever tell her about these moments,
events, or people with her… they are my moments, events or people and
I don’t see the need for her to ever know…it could be from anger
or shame or the need for silence that keeps me from ever telling her about
these moments, events or people…….
he uses these moments, events and people to explain how he got here, but
he doesn’t have to explain what they mean to him or what happened…
I could say for example, that the election of Raygun in 1980 radicalized me,
but I don’t have to go into specifics as to why, that particular event
so radicalized me… it did, by the way…but the why is really not
important for the story… it is enough to say it did and move on…
not every moment, event or person needs to be discussed or gone over…
sometimes silence is the best way to understand or feel an moment, event or
person…
Kropotkin