Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-06-2011, 03:43 PM
RE: Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
(06-06-2011 01:41 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Well, the Cognitive linguistics article seems to indicate that it is philosophical, because there is no hard evidence supporting it, or against.

Do you understand what philosophy is?

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2011, 03:54 PM
RE: Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
study of abstract systems

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2011, 04:38 PM
 
RE: Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
(06-06-2011 08:47 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(03-06-2011 11:22 PM)Inexcused Wrote:  What seems to be the difference between humans and any other animal? Is it simply biological make-up or do we have this unique aspect in which we understand where we conceptualize, judge, and argue about the world around us?

One leads to the other. Our biological makeup (i.e., our complex brains) give us a unique ability to conceptualize, judge, and argue about the world around us.

So, assuming your materialism (I apologize if I'm mistaken), thinking is a motion of atoms in the brain? Considering your claim that our ability to think as rational animals is due to the complexion of our brains, apparently over and against other existing brains of other species.
Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2011, 07:22 PM
RE: Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
(06-06-2011 03:54 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  study of abstract systems

So you can't even bother to read something when linked to it.

(06-06-2011 04:38 PM)Inexcused Wrote:  
(06-06-2011 08:47 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(03-06-2011 11:22 PM)Inexcused Wrote:  What seems to be the difference between humans and any other animal? Is it simply biological make-up or do we have this unique aspect in which we understand where we conceptualize, judge, and argue about the world around us?

One leads to the other. Our biological makeup (i.e., our complex brains) give us a unique ability to conceptualize, judge, and argue about the world around us.

So, assuming your materialism (I apologize if I'm mistaken), thinking is a motion of atoms in the brain?

Essentially, yes.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2011, 11:18 AM (This post was last modified: 07-06-2011 11:22 AM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
(06-06-2011 07:22 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(06-06-2011 03:54 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  study of abstract systems
So you can't even bother to read something when linked to it.
I have read the article many times in the past several years, and it comes down to understanding that it can be easily defined as the study of abstract systems.

Here is the table of contents, notice they are all about abstract systems - most notably the main theories section.
What field of science would you say does study abstract systems if it is not Western Philosophy?
Quote:1 Branches of philosophy
2 Western philosophy
2.1 Ancient philosophy (c. 600 BC–c. AD 400)
2.2 Medieval philosophy (c. 400–c. 1350)
2.3 Renaissance philosophy (c. 1350–c. 1600)
2.4 Early modern philosophy (c. 1600–c. 1800)
2.5 19th-century philosophy
2.6 20th-century philosophy
3 Eastern philosophy
3.1 Babylonian philosophy
3.2 Chinese philosophy
3.3 Indian philosophy
3.4 Persian philosophy
3.5 Japanese philosophy
3.6 Korean philosophy
4 Main theories
4.1 Realism and nominalism
4.2 Rationalism and empiricism
4.3 Skepticism
4.4 Idealism
4.5 Pragmatism
4.6 Phenomenology
4.7 Existentialism
4.8 Structuralism and post-structuralism
4.9 The analytic tradition

5 Moral and political philosophy
5.1 Human nature and political legitimacy
5.2 Consequentialism, deontology, and the aretaic turn

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2011, 06:43 PM
RE: Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
But that list of content doesn't seem to include biology and evolution, which is basically the only way you can answer the main poster's question. Face it, it's not a philosophical question and shouldn't be considered as one.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2011, 01:39 PM (This post was last modified: 08-06-2011 01:53 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
(07-06-2011 06:43 PM)yongkykun Wrote:  But that list of content doesn't seem to include biology and evolution, which is basically the only way you can answer the main poster's question. Face it, it's not a philosophical question and shouldn't be considered as one.
Biology and Evolution are not going to be major divisions, but rather subdivisions in the full extensions of the classification systems of the ideological systems, probably under the designation of "Science."

I provided the philosophical answer: Philosophically, we understand our environment more accurately, because of our developed skills of communications. Just because a person has a brain does not mean they understand anything, it requires the community conveying information for further development - education.

If the main poster's question asked for a biological answer than, yes, the theory of evolution would contribute to understanding such an answer.

Every question has a philosophical aspect that can be considered, because our sense of knowledge is predicated on ideological systems. But if you are going to claim that we understand our environment strictly because of the biological evolutionary development then there is no reason for schools and education???

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2011, 09:35 AM
RE: Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
Somebody, please help Unbeliever explain to me what scientific field studies the abstract systems that we human beings devise?

I desperately need to know, because it is essential to the classification system I devised.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2011, 01:14 PM (This post was last modified: 15-06-2011 02:43 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
Unbeliever did not Wrote:
(07-06-2011 11:18 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  I have read the article many times in the past several years, and it comes down to understanding that it can be easily defined as the study of abstract systems.

Here is the table of contents, notice they are all about abstract systems - most notably the main theories section.
What field of science would you say does study abstract systems if it is not Western Philosophy?

Okay, that explains what Philosophy is, but then how do you explain what it means to answer a question philosophically?
It is an adverb and it means to answer the question with respect to the abstract systems involved with the subject of the question. So in this case, what abstract systems pertain to the human understanding of our environment?

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2011, 01:41 PM
RE: Philosophically, why are human's able to understand the world around us?
(06-06-2011 07:22 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(06-06-2011 03:54 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  study of abstract systems

So you can't even bother to read something when linked to it.

(06-06-2011 04:38 PM)Inexcused Wrote:  
(06-06-2011 08:47 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(03-06-2011 11:22 PM)Inexcused Wrote:  What seems to be the difference between humans and any other animal? Is it simply biological make-up or do we have this unique aspect in which we understand where we conceptualize, judge, and argue about the world around us?

One leads to the other. Our biological makeup (i.e., our complex brains) give us a unique ability to conceptualize, judge, and argue about the world around us.

So, assuming your materialism (I apologize if I'm mistaken), thinking is a motion of atoms in the brain?

Essentially, yes.

I always thought that the difference between humans and animals was that we are humans and animals (besides humans) are not humans. I can agree with the difference in our bodies construction, but I really don't feel there is any strong evidence towards humans being far more capable. When animals are put to the test and judged (by humans) they are always judged on how "human" they are, no matter what animal they may be. To me that screams bias. This is one of my few rather disliked views that I will mention again and again. Suppositions are not definite knowledge but only suppositions, we will have a good understanding of other animals when we can communicate with them. All living things are seen to communicate (except maybe amoeba's).

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: