Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pbradley
People that spout off on Descartes trips have ruined many of my philosophy courses. You can undercut really everything for whatever personal agenda you have with a simple Cartesian rant. Often I would be in a class discussing Spinoza or Kant but then we all have to go through remedial Descartes because some twat can't suspend the question of the validity of perception. And Cartesian philosophy isn't that great, as it ignores the Heideggerian point that the existence of the world is not resting upon perceptive corporeal but the relations in which the corporeal represent in which we (our will) relates to. Pushing a Cartesian in front of a speeding bus should illustrate the point adequately. Perception is all one has and, while doubtable, they are certainly not ignorable. One needs to grow up and realize the utility of truth, just because a thing is doubtable does not mean that it isn't useful. The ramifications of aphilosophy are important to consider, unless you enjoy the idea of solipsistic catatonia.
|
True, but it is not without relevance.
Personally, yes, I do trust my memory and my senses. There is a 3D world I live in (4 if you can't time, but I don't believe time to be a dimension) but I can't comprehend if there are more than 3 dimensions, which scientific theory indicates there may be 10+. So I also see my perception as being limited, which to me, on a level of trying to understand all of history and the universe and on trying to relate to spiritual matters.
But I trust the things I've learned. You won't be pushing me in front of a bus, I won't let you.
I think it is narrow minded to believe that truth only exists in the reality of your perception when your perception is very much limited.