wenglund wrote:Assuming that one can effectively lie to oneself in that way (I have serious doubts that they can), I can see how that may work to motivate the pessimists and cynics amongst us. ;-)
However, I doubt that those lies would work for anyone absent tacit acceptance of a myriad of related truths or facts (some in ways that are so ingrained within us as to often be taken for granted and aren't at the forefront of our consciousness)--such as: one has a body that physically exists and occcupies physical space, and that body contains muscles and a brain and so forth, and those muscles will expand and contract voluntary to commands sent to the muscles from the brain, thereby setting things in motion in such a way as to cause the body to rotate from a reclined to an up-right sitting position on the bed, and then to a standing position on the floor. Furthermore, there need be the tacit acceptance of facts regarding various aspects of one's environment (I.e. the frictional surface of the bed, the solid nature of the floor, as well as various laws of physics that will come into play that will allow the body to move and stand as desired--I.e. gravity, inertia, acceleration, force, mass, etc., though one may not think of them in those terms). And, I am just scratching the surface.
To get a sense for just what all facts and truths must be tacitly accepted in executing the seemingly simple act of rising out of bed, consider the difference between a new-born infant and a grown adult. The former is significantly lacking in awareness of, let alone acceptance of, the necessary facts and truths needed to rise from their bed, and is thus entirely incapable of accomplishing such a simple act; whereas most adults can perform that action near effortlessly.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Would you say the newborn infant is able to breathe, eat, soil her diapers, etc. because she has tacitly accepted the truths associated with the physics, chemistry, biology, and sociology of those activities?
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.
wenglund wrote:Assuming that one can effectively lie to oneself in that way (I have serious doubts that they can), I can see how that may work to motivate the pessimists and cynics amongst us. ;-)
However, I doubt that those lies would work for anyone absent tacit acceptance of a myriad of related truths or facts (some in ways that are so ingrained within us as to often be taken for granted and aren't at the forefront of our consciousness)--such as: one has a body that physically exists and occcupies physical space, and that body contains muscles and a brain and so forth, and those muscles will expand and contract voluntary to commands sent to the muscles from the brain, thereby setting things in motion in such a way as to cause the body to rotate from a reclined to an up-right sitting position on the bed, and then to a standing position on the floor. Furthermore, there need be the tacit acceptance of facts regarding various aspects of one's environment (I.e. the frictional surface of the bed, the solid nature of the floor, as well as various laws of physics that will come into play that will allow the body to move and stand as desired--I.e. gravity, inertia, acceleration, force, mass, etc., though one may not think of them in those terms). And, I am just scratching the surface.
To get a sense for just what all facts and truths must be tacitly accepted in executing the seemingly simple act of rising out of bed, consider the difference between a new-born infant and a grown adult. The former is significantly lacking in awareness of, let alone acceptance of, the necessary facts and truths needed to rise from their bed, and is thus entirely incapable of accomplishing such a simple act; whereas most adults can perform that action near effortlessly.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Would you say the newborn infant is able to breathe, eat, soil her diapers, etc. because she has tacitly accepted the truths associated with the physics, chemistry, biology, and sociology of those activities?
No. Nor are those infant bodily functions relevant to the question of workability as it relates to beliefs in truth or lies (which, if you take care in observing, is the line we have most recently been reasoning). Are you missing the point?
Analytics wrote:Would you say the newborn infant is able to breathe, eat, soil her diapers, etc. because she has tacitly accepted the truths associated with the physics, chemistry, biology, and sociology of those activities?
No. Nor are those infant bodily functions relevant to the question of workability as it relates to beliefs in truth or lies (which, if you take care in observing, is the line we have most recently been reasoning). Are you missing the point?
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Personally, I get out of bed in the morning pretty-much on auto-pilot, and I don't think I am "tacitly aware" of why I am capable of doing it any more than a baby is tacitly aware of how to breathe, or any more than a flat worm is tacitly aware of how to look for food.
But anyway, I’m just answering your questions about the workability of reality--sorry it isn't going in the direction you want. Perhaps we can rewind the conversation and I’ll try to give you the answers you seem to want?
You began by asking, "Let me begin by asking you whether you think there is, by and large, an inherent workability in reality or not (entropy notwithstanding)? ;-)"
Answer: Of course! There is by and large an inherent workability in reality.
[Are we back on track?]
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.