I understand it, to the extent I understand it at the extremely abstract level it is presented. IOW where all sorts of misunderstandings may lie. I know his philosophical position probably better than most people here and I understand how he uses the terms he uses. What I specifically was asking for was how his experience, the one abstractly described, arises in a specific day, and also what he actually experiences.
Of course you could explain this more clearly to me, in precisely the ways Iamb could.
Of course I will not know what it is to be hearing impaired as someone who is impaired will be.
However, let’s draw an exact parallel. The exact parallel with my request to iamb would be to ask you to give a specific example of how this came up in a specific interaction with another person. Did it come up today? In what context? Do you happen to know what you missed due to the impairment? How does it feel emotionally when you encounter a problem due to this? What steps do you take to minimize the negative effects - not in general, but in a specific recent situation?
Those are all things you could do. Does this mean I will have the same understanding of each of your experiences you have? Obviously not. Can my understanding be increased regarding the effects, the feelings around the issue, what (in his case) triggers this feeling of being fractured and fragmented? Around what steps you take in reaction to situations where the impairment might have more important problematic effects?
Yes.
Could you tell me for example what aspects of other people’s speech or other sounds are affected? What problems arise from this? Could you tell me, for example, that background noise is a key factor in you missing things? or that it is nto, that some other facets of the situation lead to increasing the problems of the impairment?
Yes, you could. Perhaps those questions are not the best ones, but there is absolutely no possibility that I cannot come to a greater understanding of the specifics of your impairment via dialogue. All I know now is that you have an impairment. Could I learn more? Obviously.
Would I know what it is like on the inside? No.
But that’s a binary response on your part. Since I cannot come to know what it would be like on the inside, I cannot learn anything more and/or you are incapable of communicating more, just as Iamb is.
Bullshit.
And what he wrote was not an answer to my question, it was a repetition of his philosophy, a short version. I didn’t ask him for that. Who would need to? I could find that summary literally in hundreds of posts. No part of it tries to answer my questions. He’s perfectly capable of trying. He is under no obligation to do that of course. Though it’s hypocritical since he demands it of others.
.
You have no way of knowing this. You are assuming he has tried. You are assuming as a third party that you know what can and cannot be communicated by Iamb. For precisely the same reasons you are raising, you cannot possibly draw this conclusion.
I know people both with hearing impairments and others with depression, anxiety, depersonalized states and much more. And all of them are capable of going into concrete details that will give more information.
You like the person you are defending are making something binary. Of course he could give more information about the specific details in concrete instances…
And guess what Peter, that’s what he demands of his readers. I am only asking him to do what he 1) asks everyone else to do and 2) chastizes them, in various insulting ways, if they do not do it.
Precisely the type of distanced academic language he is using is the kind of thing he tells others they are using to, for example, soothe themselves with existential contraptions.
You cannot know what would happen if he actually tried to answer the question. What he did was post something using the same descriptions he has for years. And it was not an answer to my question. It was not an attempt to answer them. It did not in any way try to describe a concrete specific instance.
I’ve read your opinion. I notice what you keep not responding to. I notice you cannot admit for a second that some of the context of the questioning is such that you are in a poor position to judge. I notice that you claim to know what can and cannot be communicated, despite your own position implying you can’t be sure at all what might be accomplished if he answered the questions I posed.
Your out of your depth.