Why the apple was not knowledge, but words.

Terxpahseyton

Nobody
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
10,759
To substantiate the title of this thread, I am going to take you on a ride.
The verdict is in, through and at the end of it. Skip any of those three, and you may as well just move on.

---
State of lack of thoughts.
Pure being.
(Meditation.)
---
Most broadly – it means anything anyone ever was. (Hey!)
But more narrowly, it IMO seems to encompass a state of total reflection. A state where outside stimuli have disappeared and oneself is a hall of mirrors.
---
Imagine being a dog. Why not be my girl. Her name is Lara. Her is a picture.
---
lara1.jpg

---
Lara has a rich emotional life. She can be bored, relaxed, cozy, tense, suspenseful, playful, aggressive, friendly, sad, out-going, angry, impatient, hungry, thirsty, full, confused, curious and about a million other words.
---
She can have to take crap or piss, can be indignant, have an appetite for wild grass, feel lonely or welcomed, feel excited or remember those long gong or rejoice those always there.
---
In fact. I have a hard time to think of something which I can feel and she can not.
---
Oh I can name conglomerations! Exhilaration in the process of enjoying a fantastic party or getting to be intimate with a desirable women or writing a great story!
---
But I am not sure those things stand for actual feelings which are beyond what Lara feels. Can I be more happy, pleased, excited, exhilarated, pushed, energized than Lara? Once I break it down – I feel that if anything my base feelings are actually inferior to her capacity to feel.



THE CONGLERMATE

It seems to me that I just have big conglomerates of words describing what I feel.
I have clusters of meanings.
---
For instance – the joy I have in writing this peace is clearly there. I enjoy doing it. Lara can not.
Does this mean I know actual, clear, distilled experiences she can not?
I suggest – no.
It does not.
It, so I would like to have you consider - only means that I can wrap and entangle and encapsulate and designing and structure a vast web of experiences.
And in the process of, to stick with the introductory example, writing this peace, I can draw upon this web. Use it. Enjoy. Cherish. Have it grow. Have it grow me.
And for all the beauty and creativity of it – I think, in the end, I just have got a drawer full of caskets of primal emotions any tramp dog will experience.

The only difference is – I can use them on, more or less, indirect purpose. By structuring my doing. For instance within the structure of this piece of writing.
---
The point – I am no more. I just control.
---
Art is such control in purity. It means to focus on construing said webs in ways which – more or less - enchant us.
And while that is all good.
---
That is power
That is control.
---
To return to the title:
That – I would like to have you image, consider, and utopian best experimentally embrace - is also our undoing.
---
Because if unreflected.
If unchecked.
If allowed to have free reign.
---
Then, chains form. The power of the WORD is too great to control out of the wrist.
It will control you. Corrupt you. Tell you. Direct you.
---
Structure
You

Structure
Society.

And in the end.

Structure reigns over being
---
And we have our heads full of thoughts we can not handle.
Innocence lost, born out of what we wanted to control, control went the way of the Terminator.
---
My POV may be flawed. (and please point out how, while noticing it)
But I think it got value.
And there is an easy test.
---
The test is to let go of words and see what is happening to you.
I don't expect it. But if you are some particularly ballsy dude – perhaps you can share your experience trying it.
Right now, I personally lack the balls. 'Cause in the midst of strangers any reasonable person will probably be afraid of humiliation. So am I.
 
Given you are German and interested in 'meditation', you could read the short story by Hermann Hesse titled "The end of Dr. Knelge". In my view it is one of his best stories, and deals with a hyperbolic situation in some 'alternative lifestyle' colony set in coastal Asia Minor for (mostly) western/northern euro people who want to live as vegans or a collective, or just are tired with life as it is in cities.
Some people there strive to remove themselves alltogether from the world of thought and communication. One of them (the so-termed 'Jonas the ape') appears to have managed to do this.

The end is quite intense.
 
Given you are German and interested in 'meditation', you could read the short story by Hermann Hesse titled "The end of Dr. Knelge". In my view it is one of his best stories, and deals with a hyperbolic situation in some 'alternative lifestyle' colony set in coastal Asia Minor for (mostly) western/northern euro people who want to live as vegans or a collective, or just are tired with life as it is in cities.
Some people there strive to remove themselves alltogether from the world of thought and communication. One of them (the so-termed 'Jonas the ape') appears to have managed to do this.

The end is quite intense.
I most certainly will. Sounds mesmerizing. Especially since Hesse has written about the only novel I had to read for school in my teens and without even wanting to very much enjoyed.

Thank you very much!
 
That is up to you, I am afraid.

I would be most happy to clarify anything unclear or incomprehensible or supposedly incoherent. As it is - I find it quit clear. But that is also me assuming a readership already in charge of their own thoughts. Charge of in the spirit of Kant.

I guess I could write a long assay of further clarification. But would you read it?

In the end - if this OP is so incomprehensible that you are inclined to think that any further bother is too much recognition, I will mark you as dumb. I honestly regret to say so, since I am fully aware of what that means to those happening to read it and I am very much not fond of the expected reaction.
But that is how I feel.
Because it, IMO, really is not that hard. It just requires some reflection.
But I guess many are not used to reflect on things society does not tell them to.
I already foresee 'Ah you are the only who is not a sheep' and statements like that.
But to those seeing that as legitimate 'counter-argument', I have to say it betrays itself. For all are sheep to some extend. How else will you belong. And you have to belong to something. Even if it is only an idea.
 
That is up to you, I am afraid.

I would be most happy to clarify anything unclear or incomprehensible or supposedly incoherent. As it is - I find it quit clear. But that is also me assuming a readership already in charge of their own thoughts. Charge of in the spirit of Kant.

I guess I could write a long assay of further clarification. But would you read it?

There is a quote by Wittgenstein (iirc in the prelude of the Tractatus) along the lines of:
"The following lines will only be of use to people who already have thought of roughly those same terms".

Reminds me of an older quote, by Baudelaire: "When Jesus Christ claims that 'those who are hungry shall become content with satisfying their need', Jesus is making a calculation of probabilities" :D
 
There is a quote by Wittgenstein (iirc in the prelude of the Tractatus) along the lines of:
"The following lines will only be of use to people who already have thought of roughly those same terms".
I don't know. Maybe I am asking too much. What is too much? I just know that a person I am supposed to respect not for itself but its intellect will at least be able to ask more or less intelligent questions about my OP.
That is just the image of a sophisticated intellect I got in my head. Perhaps I will have to revise it.

And now I feel painfully reminiscent of the book I am reading at the moment - The Ragged Trousered Philanthropist ( at the courtesy of Cheezy - we may and do strongly disagree on most fundamental issues - but I really love that book, so thanks man! :)). A big part of that book is also about how so many are painfully numbed in their thinking. And as always, that pains the one seeing it the most. And that makes the numbed only more angry. A vicious circle of self-assertion.
Reminds me of an older quote, by Baudelaire: "When Jesus Christ claims that 'those who are hungry shall become content with satisfying their need', Jesus is making a calculation of probabilities" :D
That is awesome. But for entirely personal motives, since I am very much concerned with causation and probability regarding the human condition.
Because it so delicately and clearly and most of all painfully fracks the premises of liberalism right down into its silly arse.
 
As a person with academical education in philosophy I approve this thread.

We need more practical philosophy threads or the younger CFC generation might think philosophy ends with Carl Popper (dead at 1994) or Wittgenstein (dead at 1951).
 
I approve this thread too.

I can't say I understand it, though. It's like a Millman thread would be if he'd taken acid.

But anyway...

Words are knowledge. Because it's not until we can name something that we can tell ourselves we have knowledge of it.

So the apple was from the tree of knowledge, because knowledge is verbal.

Well, that's my thesis anyway. Shoot it down if you wish, I'm not over invested in it. But at least it's brief and to the point.
 
This topic is fascinating. It impacts way more than we might think at first, probably. NPR show(transcript) on language and spatial thinking and some of the ramifications linked below.

http://www.radiolab.org/story/91725-words/transcript/

Oooh! Found it on audio, but it's 60 minutes. The transcript might be better, either way, it's really long, but kinda interesting and on the topic of the difference between beings that have words and do not.
 
Don't all mammals have at least proto-language, though?

I've never been comfortable with the <whatever> distinguishes human beings from other animals line.
 
Don't all mammals have at least proto-language, though?

I've never been comfortable with the <whatever> distinguishes human beings from other animals line.

Well, yes, and the degree of complexity varies quite a bit. There's a huge difference in some of the cognitive abilities between a chicken and a parrot, or a dolphin.
 
Actually, I think there's been some research lately that points to plants being more aware about their surroundings than we've ever thought before. But I don't really remember many details other that it was a bit eye opening..
 
I remember hearing about a plant that warns it's neighbours by pheromones when a giraffe is nearby. Googling found me this

http://www.asknature.org/strategy/079b6be05780ad57345adbf6797e78ec#.VFk1gclQKUk

"The African acacias, well-protected though they may be by their thorns, use distasteful chemicals in their leaves as a second line of defence. Furthermore, and most remarkably, they warn one another that they are doing so. At the same time as they fill their leaves with poison, they release ethylene gas which drifts out of the pores of their leaves. Other acacias within fifty yards are able to detect this and as soon as they do so, they themselves begin to manufacture poison and distribute it to their leaves." (Attenborough 1995:70)

I now have an image of a giraffe sneaking up on a shrubbery.
 
Plants do all sorts of strange things, I agree. The most startling one that I know of is "poisoning" the ground nearby so that other germinating plants can't get a look in.

I've yet to be persuaded that any plant behaviour constitutes cognition, though. More like really complex chemical reactions. But then human cognition is just a matter of really complex chemical reactions too. So... I'm at a bit of a loss now.

Let's face it, people, we don't understand consciousness at all: What is it? Where did it come from? And where did it go?
 
Well, I wouldn't call it cognition. I would just say that there are varying levels of the stuff that makes cognition possible, and we seem to have a lot more of it. A central nervous system certain helps.

Ziggy, that's exactly the thing I was talking about btw!
 
Back
Top Bottom