Noam Chomsky's Epistemic Approach

Chomsky disavows the empiricist concept of the mind being a tabula rasa, a concept that serves as a basis for behavioral science. Instead, his theory develops on the rationalistic approaches of the Continental philosophers in the Cartesian legacy that had a powerful culmination in Kantian epistemology. The mind is not a passive theatre stage on which ideas and sensations make impressions. Instead, it is a powerful and active organizer that has a unique capability for innovation and creation. This human species specific capability is what sets is apart from the animal world. So, obviously it is quite assymetric to turn to the study of animal behavior in order to understand human behavior, especially when it comes to study of creative skills.

Share:

Taunting Temptings, Winning Words (Matthew 4) - Sermon Outline

A. TAUNTING TEMPTINGS (Matthew 4)
1. ABUSE OF DIVINE POSITION
"Son of God? Turn these stones to bread"
2. ABUSE OF DIVINE PROMISE
"It is written He'll order angels to catch.. so jump!"
3. ABUSE OF DIVINE PREROGATIVE
"Bow to me and the world'll bow to you!"

B. WINNING WORDS
1. MY PROVISION IS FROM GOD
"Not just by food but by His word"
2. MY PERSUASION IS OF GOD
"Don't tempt!"
3. MY PASSION IS FOR GOD
"Worship and serve only Him!"

Share:

Actual Infinities Empirically Exist?

It is obvious that actual infinities are rationally (metaphysically) impossible, in the sense of their capability of being empirically conceptualized. One can't conceive such an  infinity in empirical terms. The only way  one can try to conceptualize such is by attempting a measurement function that is potential in nature. Zeno demonstrated this long ago in order to discredit the credibility of phenomenal experiences, which accordingly are logically untenable. (See Achilles and the Tortoise and The Stadium). Zeno used the paradoxes to support his monist metaphysics. However, the arguments could, I think, be equally used to dump the reliability of rational metaphysics and cheer pluralistic realism.

W L Craig interprets Zeno's infinite divisions as potential and not actual.  What he means is that one can go on, empirically,  dividing a distance endlessly and never reach a metaphysical point of indivisibility, though in reality (experience), traversing distances is a daily affair - we do cross roads. He sticks to the empirical angle of interpreting the paradox. What I think Craig has done is to reiterate that actual infinities are not metaphysically possible, though the empirical concept of crossing roads, for instance, shows that an actual infinite distance was traversed in actual time (empirical sense, also infinitely divisible). In other words, when the rational function is applied to an empirical fact, a paradox ensues. Subjective and objective epistemology vs ontology issues are tense here. It can also mean that the distance between two points is an objectively actual infinity of points, and the act of traversing is potential meaning that the athlete cannot metaphysically traverse the distance, though he physically does it. The problem is there because a distance between points is an empirical concept while division is a rational category. The problem still remains.

However, it seems to me that strictly speaking, potentiality is an empirical category and not a rational one. Rationally speaking, the objective infinity of divisions is actual, though empirically absurd.

Share:

The Liar Paradox

The first sentence on this post is false. 

Statements are either true or false only in the sense that they possess content. A self-discrediting statement is neither false nor true, thus violating its own function.

Share:

On Nominalism

You can only sense something that is there (somewhere, in or out). And, one attempts to name what one senses in order to identify, record, express, and connect. From sensation to idea formation to naming to expressing is an incredible journey. In most cases, existing names are identified and matched with subjective sensations. In most cases, as well, these identifiers get modified to represent and establish newer sense-ideas. Thus, word meanings get enhanced and extended, or may become obsolete or replaced. In other cases, words are imported where there is a lack, and in some cases, created or recreated.

Share:

Latest posts

Popular Posts

Blog Archive

Translate