General Discussion

Apologetics and Theology

Read 1154 times

Pragmatic

  • ***
  • 4006 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Memory of a dream
« Reply #30 on: June 02, 2016, 03:23:36 pm »
You literally just said that all we can know is our perceptual experiences of things, not the things themselves. How is this not solipsism?
Religion was born when the first con man met the first fool.

1

confused

  • **
  • 335 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Memory of a dream
« Reply #31 on: June 02, 2016, 03:33:17 pm »
You literally just said that all we can know is our perceptual experiences of things, not the things themselves. How is this not solipsism?

Immanuel Kant held the same exact view and he wasn't a solipsist.  It's called transcendental idealism.

2

Atheist in Louisiana

  • ***
  • 2631 Posts
  • I ain't afraid of no ghost!
    • View Profile
    • Atheist in Louisiana
Re: Memory of a dream
« Reply #32 on: June 02, 2016, 03:34:35 pm »
Can you tell me what solipsism is?
Had the magazine not published these cartoons, they would not have been specifically targeted.
Consequences, AiL, consequences. - Jenna Black

Hey, if you want to, I'm more than ok with it.  :)  I love the attention. - Questions11

3

Pragmatic

  • ***
  • 4006 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Memory of a dream
« Reply #33 on: June 02, 2016, 03:39:45 pm »
You literally just said that all we can know is our perceptual experiences of things, not the things themselves. How is this not solipsism?

Immanuel Kant held the same exact view and he wasn't a solipsist.  It's called transcendental idealism.

No, he did not hold the same view. While he held that we cannot access things-in-themselves, he at no point ever said that all we can know is our perceptual experiences of things. He is infamous for "discovering" what he called the categories, and knowledge of such things are not simple perceptual experiences. In other words, we can know, in addition to our perceptual experiences, how our own conceptual apparatus must be in order to even have such experiences in the first place.
Religion was born when the first con man met the first fool.

4

confused

  • **
  • 335 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Memory of a dream
« Reply #34 on: June 02, 2016, 03:51:19 pm »
You literally just said that all we can know is our perceptual experiences of things, not the things themselves. How is this not solipsism?

Immanuel Kant held the same exact view and he wasn't a solipsist.  It's called transcendental idealism.

No, he did not hold the same view. While he held that we cannot access things-in-themselves, he at no point ever said that all we can know is our perceptual experiences of things. He is infamous for "discovering" what he called the categories, and knowledge of such things are not simple perceptual experiences. In other words, we can know, in addition to our perceptual experiences, how our own conceptual apparatus must be in order to even have such experiences in the first place.

When did I argue against categories?

5

Johan Biemans (jbiemans)

  • *****
  • 12686 Posts
  • WCBP - http://tinyurl.com/agmwhpj
    • View Profile
Re: Memory of a dream
« Reply #35 on: June 02, 2016, 05:18:55 pm »
Quote
I find this ironic since you pretty much already believe solipsism, since you believe the entire world is inside your head.

You do realize that there is difference between the entire world, and the virtual representation of the world that is inside my head, right ?  Or do you think that when we take a picture of something we are actually moving it into the camera ?  (I am sorry to be sarcastic here, but it does not seem like you are actually taking the time to try to listen here, you are just offering responses that don't seem to take our statements into account).

Explain the difference.

I am sorry, I am not interested in playing this game.

6

Pragmatic

  • ***
  • 4006 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Memory of a dream
« Reply #36 on: June 02, 2016, 05:38:46 pm »
You literally just said that all we can know is our perceptual experiences of things, not the things themselves. How is this not solipsism?

Immanuel Kant held the same exact view and he wasn't a solipsist.  It's called transcendental idealism.

No, he did not hold the same view. While he held that we cannot access things-in-themselves, he at no point ever said that all we can know is our perceptual experiences of things. He is infamous for "discovering" what he called the categories, and knowledge of such things are not simple perceptual experiences. In other words, we can know, in addition to our perceptual experiences, how our own conceptual apparatus must be in order to even have such experiences in the first place.

When did I argue against categories?

Uh, I don't think you did. However, the categories are examples of non-perceptual knowledge, so Kant doesn't agree that the only things we can know are "perceptions". Anyways, this feels pointless. Cya.
Religion was born when the first con man met the first fool.