Re: Philosophy specifies: organisms process information

On 23 apr, 06:06, j.wilki...@xxxxxxxxx (John Wilkins) wrote:
dkomo <dkomo...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
John Wilkins wrote:

[snip]

Sure - so long as you are talking about the *narratives*. I was joking
with my initial comment; but it seems to me that we should not accept
that the world just is what we tell ourselves it is. That really is
insane. Or religious. At the least it is anthropomorphism.

We may never have a narrative that is adequate to all phenomena (unless
you want to say that the phenomena are also narrative inventions), but I
think that it really *is* an IBE that there is an external reality.

The narrative of an external reality violates Occam's razor. It is
superfluous. If there actually were no independent, objective external
reality, it wouldn't make the slightest difference. We'd still have all
our scientific models and theories, and, if it makes us feel better, we
could go on believing in an independent reality. The important thing
is, though, that our models *work*. They allow us to predict, and in
the realm of engineering (even for biology) they allow us to produce
useful products to make our lives better.

I suggest that sanity is simply a collection of narratives that work for
us, and that the large majority of our peers believe in.

I think scientific realism does conform to Occam's Razor - because it
licenses inferences from one art of a theory to another without needing
further justifications (i.e., if the theory says electrons exist, then
in any other part of the theory, or in any other theory, we can say
electrons exist and are causally influential).

That said, full-blown realism is of course a matter of belief, not of
epistemic warrant. All we need *in science* is some kind of internal
realism - true in T, that sort of thing. But I find full blown realism
solves a further *metaphysical* issue - the stability of things. So it
is parsimonious for me to adopt it.

There is a further justification I find useful - it removes human agency
in acts of knowledge from being the reason for thinking things are true.
If all that "reality" is is the sum of human acts of knowing, then we
need to account for how human acts determine anything, both individually
and intersubjectively. If the claim, however, is that these acts are
interactions with the mind-independent world, then they become
unmysterious. Otherwise we have no way to privilege the narratives of a
"normal scientist" over the "schizophrenic mystic's".

There's no proof of realism, because all proofs presuppose some
grounding and are therefore either question begging in favour or
against. But there's enough reason to think there *is* a world apart
from ideational narratives.

Some time ago i came up with these:

Axioms of living in the Real World

1. A real world exists and we can observe it,
2. Different obsevations of the Real World will yield consistent
results.

Acceptence of reality is very parsimonious, since in order to believe
that all the world is my creation, i would have to assume I dreamed up
all the masterworks: Beethovens Fifth and Ninth, The Mona Lisa,
Michelangelos David, The Nachtwacht, Haikus by Basho and History by P.
Corenlius Tacitus (and the Latin and Japanese languages they are
written in) etc. Attributing all those skills to myself seems rather
overbearing to say the very least, so in my view, Occams razor does
not conflict with the axioms above.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Philosophy specifies: organisms process information
    ... think that it really *is* an IBE that there is an external reality. ... I think scientific realism does conform to Occam's Razor - because it ... If all that "reality" is is the sum of human acts of knowing, ... from ideational narratives. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Philosophy specifies: organisms process information
    ... think that it really *is* an IBE that there is an external reality. ... I think scientific realism does conform to Occam's Razor - because it ... If all that "reality" is is the sum of human acts of knowing, ... from ideational narratives. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Philosophy specifies: organisms process information
    ... The narrative of an external reality violates Occam's razor. ... I suggest that sanity is simply a collection of narratives that work for ... I think scientific realism does conform to Occam's Razor - because it ... All we need *in science* is some kind of internal ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Philosophy specifies: organisms process information
    ... The narrative of an external reality violates Occam's razor. ... I suggest that sanity is simply a collection of narratives that work for ... I think scientific realism does conform to Occam's Razor - because it ... If all that "reality" is is the sum of human acts of knowing, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Philosophy specifies: organisms process information
    ... think that it really *is* an IBE that there is an external reality. ... I think scientific realism does conform to Occam's Razor - because it ... electrons exist and are causally influential). ... If all that "reality" is is the sum of human acts of knowing, ...
    (talk.origins)