Communicating Internal Awareness (Foundationalism)
posted by DavidA | February 28, 2011
- Login or register to post comments
- Print this page
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Propeller
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
IcerocketThese days we (evolvers) take for granted the wise words of the great philosophical thinkers before us because they seem so obvious. But, putting structure to these ideas act as proofs in geometry, (which was Descartes idea actually) and it solidifies complex ideas as postulates for further proofs. Its an appealing idea because who dares to argue the truth of things like the Pythagorean theorem?
I read an aristotle quote that was really obvious but it seems to be the starting point... something like "All humans desire to know." Its a good starting point because, why try to explain anything to anyone unless it was a given that they want to know the truth at all.
So on top of these ideas from Aristotle and Descartes I think we should try to build the house of truth from our internal experiences, using words that we can define for ourselves from words that are more foundational (and these ideas you may have already had so congratulations on your would be philosophical achievements of 500 and 1000 years ago)
Descartes boiled it down to all he can know entirely for sure is that he is a thinking thing, and that doesn't mean he has to have a body at all. But we're pretty sure we have bodies so how should we structure what we know? I believe like Descartes, and Im sure you do to that we can create a philosophy like geometry that we can all agree with. That's the challenge I'm giving all of us here now. Where should we start, and how should we move forward with it?
I've got some opinions about it, but it's not very strong.. or is foundationalism the most effective way to communicate internal awareness at all? If not, what is?
Comments
start by finishing what we've started...
— Feb 28, 2011
No one wisdom hat holds all the aces. And I doubt there is anything new under the sun. But we should still take account of the history and fundamentals of philosophy. To come full circle and unlearn that which we have learned until now.
Descartes thinking draws much on the ancients and barely scratches the surface of modern times. There are other philosophers since then who have tried to reconcile the thoughts which got them and indeed us all here. And here we have British Empiricism and the French Enlightenment to come threw yet. Look at some other thinkers, maybe John Locke who might be considered adverse to some Cartesian thinking.
In 'The Social Contract', Rousseau sees freedom and liberty not as a license to do whatever you want, but rather, the opportunity to do the right thing. This includes obedience to authority; -not an authority that is imposed on you, but one that governs by the assent of the citizens.
Rousseau's, 'Emile' might also be a good book to check out which postulates that, little ones, still in their natural and uncorrupted state, should have their spontaneous natures encouraged, not thwarted.
"Seek not abroad, turn back into thyself, for in the inner man dwells the truth..."
