Gaffaweb >
Love & Anger >
1989-33 >
[ Date Index |
Thread Index ]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
From: stewarte@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (The Man Who Invented Himself)
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 89 19:20:31 -0800
Subject: Re: Is Doug's chair really red?
Newsgroups: rec.music.gaffa
Organization: Burst Continuous Forms -- We're not small, we're just far away
References: <8912111632.AA00420@GAFFA.MIT.EDU>
Reply-To: stewarte@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (little electric god)
rossi@NUSC.NAVY.MIL ("ROSSI JOHN") will no doubt deny ever having said: >That is, Doug is correct in his >assertion that we should consider it a fact that he sits in a red >chair if any of us would agree that his chair is, indeed, red after >looking at it. Okay... >Although >this is semantically similar to his postulation that agreement on >quality of subjective experience also constitutes "truth", it is, indeed, >quite different. The meer fact that appreciation of quality remains >totally subjective, the experience can not really become a matter >of public demonstration (as is the color of his chair). No matter how >many people agree on a subjective experience, such data do not >constitute "facts". Subjective experience remains that. It seems to me you are disclaiming |>oug's assertion without any support for your position. In what way is it quite different? Quality can certainly be a matter of public demonstration; if you asked people on the street whether the Mona Lisa was a good work of art, I'll bet that you'd get very few who would say no. Probably as few as would declare that Doug's chair isn't red. Some folks would probably say yes just because they know that they're supposed to think that the Mona Lisa is good. What we call subjective experience is what we perceive through our senses, filtered through our value systems. What we call objective is ostensibly unfiltered by those values. However, it is not at all clear to me that this latter is possible in any real sense. Many types of insanity or chemical mind alteration cause people to experience things quite different from "normal" reality -- we often view this as a distorting layer between them and reality. Perhaps our "normal" minds also present such a distorting layer. Who can say? Ultimately, we have no data that is not subjective, at least in the sense of coming from our own perceptual systems. -- Stewart -- "Don't forget this shit." -- James Blood Ulmer /* uunet!sco!stewarte -or- stewarte@sco.COM -or- Stewart Evans */