Page 1 of 12
Can Idealism be without thought?
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:25 pm
by Lou Gold
That's the question.
Re: Can Idealism be without thought?
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:29 pm
by SanteriSatama
It is a metaphysical position expressed in language, in that sense no. But perhaps that was not what you were really asking?
Is sentience as such dependent from matter and/or sapience? I would suggest not.
Re: Can Idealism be without thought?
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:36 pm
by Soul_of_Shu
Nothing can be without consciousness, including ideas, which is the point of the idea of idealism.
Re: Can Idealism be without thought?
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:52 pm
by Lou Gold
Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:36 pm
Nothing can be without consciousness, including ideas, which is the point of the idea of idealism.
Can consciousness be without mentation?
Can reason be without thinking?
It is a metaphysical position expressed in language, in that sense no. But perhaps that was not what you were really asking?
I definitely was not asking about expression in language.
Re: Can Idealism be without thought?
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:59 pm
by MaartenV
advaita vedanta talks about pure awareness, without any thought. That's the real you.
Re: Can Idealism be without thought?
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2021 8:05 pm
by Lou Gold
MaartenV wrote: ↑Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:59 pm
advaita vedanta talks about pure awareness, without any thought. That's the real you.
I agree!
The question, however, is whether a 'Western Non-dualism' or 'rational spiritualism' is possible.
Re: Can Idealism be without thought?
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2021 8:06 pm
by Soul_of_Shu
Under idealism Consciousness is the ontological primitive. The activity of this fundamental, irreducible Consciousness, i.e. its 'mentation'/'ideation', is its ontological imperative ~ as inextricable as formlessness><form. I'd suggest that any reasoning is a function of it being meta-conscious.
Re: Can Idealism be without thought?
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2021 8:28 pm
by SanteriSatama
Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Mon Jan 18, 2021 8:06 pm
Under idealism Consciousness is the ontological primitive. The activity of this fundamental, irreducible Consciousness, i.e. its 'mentation'/'ideation', is its ontological imperative ~ as inextricable as formlessness><form. I'd suggest that any reasoning is a function of it being meta-conscious.
Process philosophy does not support the ideation of any ontological primitive in the first place, substance is not presumed. The problem with substance metaphysics, which also Bernardo runs into, is projection of meta-cognition into infinite regress of nesting with cosmic solipsism on top. The lonely navel gazing god as the experiencER that experiencing supposedly requires. Whether this is intended or not, it's an image hard to avoid when starting from substance metaphysics.
Re: Can Idealism be without thought?
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2021 8:34 pm
by Lou Gold
Under idealism Consciousness is the ontological primitive. The activity of this fundamental, irreducible Consciousness, i.e. its 'mentation'/'ideation', is its ontological imperative ~ as inextricable as formlessness><form. I'd suggest that any reasoning is a function of it being meta-conscious
Did you just violate your initial observation? >>>
It is a metaphysical position expressed in language, in that sense no.
Re: Can Idealism be without thought?
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2021 8:39 pm
by Lou Gold
SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Mon Jan 18, 2021 8:28 pm
Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Mon Jan 18, 2021 8:06 pm
Under idealism Consciousness is the ontological primitive. The activity of this fundamental, irreducible Consciousness, i.e. its 'mentation'/'ideation', is its ontological imperative ~ as inextricable as formlessness><form. I'd suggest that any reasoning is a function of it being meta-conscious.
Process philosophy does not support the ideation of any ontological primitive in the first place, substance is not presumed. The problem with substance metaphysics, which also Bernardo runs into, is projection of meta-cognition into infinite regress of nesting with cosmic solipsism on top. The lonely navel gazing god as the experiencER that experiencing supposedly requires. Whether this is intended or not, it's an image hard to avoid when starting from substance metaphysics.
Yes! Very hard to avoid.