Where does meaning come from?

Can you describe the actual future? And then give me an example?

:smiley:

You said just not the way we have ever viewed it before now. That sounded interested to me. So I asked for a glimmer of what it is you might be seeing, encode_decode…the something which you intuited as being different.
You made a distinction.

Can I describe the actual future? Actual is kind of a written-in-stone word, don’t you think? But we can more or less describe our futures based on our present moments; namely, our jobs, what we might desire to achieve if we have a good work ethic, the direction in which our children may go if we have conversations with them and listen to them, listen to the News, based on human history and how we repeat our same mistakes, or how we have learned from the consequences of our actions and are at least pretty sure that we would go in another direction.

I do not think that we need to be psychics to come close to describing what we for the most part see our futures to be - of course, barring the foreseen - like Hurricanes, tornadoes and such. But even those we can somewhat see in our future if we are not afraid to follow the signs.

Again, there is nothing absolute but you did say Just Not the Way…

I will be responding to you Arc, I am just very busy at the moment.

My real goal with meaning is that it comes from somewhere like everything - out of the fundamental substance of the universe whether anyone likes that idea or not. Meaning is obviously derivative in nature - I do however think there is a point of contrast that takes place just prior to meaning being born each time associated with an event.

It is this point that I am trying to discover.

This is some difficult stuff but it has all started at the top - with intelligent beings(all of you lovely people) from there we can make meaning meaningful.

:smiley:

Have you ever given any thought to the distinction between epistemic awareness and experiential awareness?

It’s a distinction I use in my metaphysics to contrast the difference in “knowing” and “experiencing”. I think your search for that which “ignites” meaning from an event might benefit from this distinction. It could be that nothing “ignites” meaning per se, that meaning is always there, always being delivered, always in flux, always begetting further meaning, but there is a point at which it passes from the realm of “incomprehensible” meaning to “comprehensible” meaning (and comprehensible to humans beings in particular, but that’s because I assume we’re all human beings here). After that point, human beings can apprehend it. Before that point, it is indistinguishable from a total lack of meaning.

gib

I am still a noob at most philosophy so my arguments are not always going to be perfect. I think my arguments are worthwhile however. I am of course in need of understanding the very question that I have presented. Before we potentially take leave of our senses, we must consider the question as you have gib . . .

Perhaps you have either identified that I have or have not. Knowing and experiencing on the other hand form the triangle with meaning in that meanings have no precise mathematical deltas except for the very moments of time each seed sprouts into a seedling of meaning. I am suggesting that meaning is contained within any given seed before each sprouts - that it is waiting to happen . . . to be defined - sometimes fading before sprouting.

Once the seed has sprouted the meaning can then be known, experienced or cause some other effect. The question is where it(meaning) comes from and not what it is. I therefore say it comes about before it is recognized and that it does not have to be further formed to have its potentiality. As you say:

A point(a seed). To which I like it. To which I assert: Meaning is obviously derivative in nature - I do however think there is a point of contrast that takes place just prior to meaning being born each time associated with an event.

Very sensible gib! It is sensible that you have brought this conversation back on track, thanks man.

I like the way you look at it and I will consider the analytical factors you have presented here.

Would you have any objection to me mirroring parts of the conversation that we have had on my own site? I will give you another name if it makes you feel more comfortable. I just think others could benefit from the interaction that has taken place between us. You are free to object, of course . . .

:smiley:

Hello again, Mr. List, :evilfun:

But Mr. List, have you not JUST responded to me? But I know what you mean.

What would this fundamental substance be? I kind of see it as star stuff and then it took hold and evolved into Everything today which is in our universe.
Perhaps you mean something different from it.
Perhaps you are even trying to take it deeper and further back - maybe into the God question.
If substance can be both physical and intangible, which it can be - as in ideas(?) and the scent of the rose - then perhaps the Fundamental Substance is pure Energy. What do I know?

Why would some not like the idea that meaning comes from somewhere like everything?

Meaning would necessarily have to come from something. We all just see it differently; different material and ideas give life its meaning.
And maybe there again you are speaking differently when you say meaning.

Human nature or otherwise nature?

I am not sure what you mean here, encode_decode.
I might be wrong in your meaning but you seem to be saying here that people normally judge between two or more things at the moment before meaning takes place?
Meaning doesn’t occur or take flight like this I don’t think.
If we are consciously judging observing what is more meaningful to us then that is another thing.

I do not know much at all about these things but if you are looking for some point, perhaps it might occur at some actual point within the brain where patterns have long been set up which, along with one’s brain chemicals, causes the mind and the body to resonate and to be thoroughly magnetized by whatever it is which conjures up the meaning.
Egads!! #-o

[quote]
This is some difficult stuff but it has all started at the top - with intelligent beings(all of you lovely people) from there we can make meaning meaningful.

So are you saying that, for instance, not knowing what causes a rainbow, one would not, could not, see the beauty and meaning of a rainbow?

Not at all. You may copy our conversation wherever you wish. You may even use my name.

I forgot to tie my last post to the point I was making. What does the difference between knowledge and experience have to do with incomprehensible meaning passing to comprehensible meaning? Any kind of meaning can be experienced, but only comprehensible meaning can be known. Take the ball bouncing off the wall we talked about earlier. If my theory’s right, then it has some kind of experience that we cannot comprehend. But the ball has other physical effects that lead to our awareness of the ball bouncing off the wall. Light rays are constantly reflected off the ball and stream into our eyes. Those light rays are transduced into chemical and electrical signals. Those signals travel up the optic nerve until they hit the visual cortex. When that happens, we see the ball. But each of those intermediary steps is a physical action just like the ball bouncing off the wall. If my theory’s correct, that means each of those physical actions also comes with a subjective experience of some kind. Not the same as that had by the ball/wall system, but something unique to the exact character of the physical action. As each physical action gives way to the next physical action, each experience in turn gives way to the next experience. The meaning therein “begets” the next meaning. It “entails” it to use my vocabulary. The visual perception of the ball bouncing off the wall that we finally see is the first experience in the series that is finally comprehensible. This just means it is the first experience for which there can be knowledge of that experience. We can know that we are experiencing it. Of course, it takes further processing in the brain for the visual experience to become knowledge of what is being visually experienced, which is just to say the meaning of the visual experience must “beget” or “entail” the knowledge, but now it can be done.

gib

I appreciate you and the many interactions that we have now had - You are a very kind person gib.

That is great - I really appreciate that. I was in need of awesome content and what better than content that is interactive?

I am still yet to take you up on your previous suggestions so I am still for now going to answer with the old knowledge that is my own from my head with temporarily no further consideration.

I do believe meaning is something that happens anyway, that the animal understands meaning whether it is a calculated understanding or a known understanding - but what is known anyway? In another thread I discussed another layer:

  1. Unknown
  2. Inception
  3. Known

Now I will add the contextual layer which brings a meta understanding for us humans which transcends the animal level of known. First we incept the unknown so that it can become known but it is only known the second time around that the inception is to become perception known as known - we as humans are able to think about incepts and transform them into percepts - but there is no substitute for experience and solid theory.

I will leave that there for now with the intention that it will ignite conversation.

Your theory sounds interesting, lets keep talking about this. You seem to be talking about mirror actions - we have a set of neurons for those and that is where empathy has its roots - these neurons are quite weak to begin with and over time strengthen in the impressionable years to create in us the monster or the preferred wonderful person. Two lots of processing I am led to believe is all it takes for experience to become knowledge - at this stage it is rudimentary and is in need of further experience/meta-experience.

It seems we are traversing some of the same ground with two different methods, which is why I say that all versions of reality are pointing at the truth.

encode,

You are too kind in your assessment of my kindness. :laughing:

BTW, over in the rationality thread, I posted this:

I like to get permission before I grab someone’s quote and start plastering all over the place. I guess this is an example of my kindness.

Also, I noticed that every time I quote you in my responses, I see this:

encode's list.png

What kind of device are you using to post? Why does it always insist on prepending an empty list to your posts?

Hi gib,

I like to use the empty list to move the first part of my post down one line - the padding phpbb uses is not enough for my liking.
I think that is why Arc calls me Mr List.

You are welcome to quote me - in fact you can have that as a present - you have done plenty for me.

What I am most grateful for is the way I am made think to structure certain parts of my pattern theory for mind.
Which I am still not happy with.

:wink:

Brilliant!!! :astonished: =D> :laughing:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEzG8t4-x34[/youtube]

???

You do realize that you can insert as many blank lines as you like, just by pressing . Right?

You should try that some time.

I just did. Why do you think there are so many spaces under “gib wrote” in my last post?

Is your browser removing the spaces?

I meant at the beginning of your post, before anything is written.

.

.

.
Hi encode_decode :laughing:

Me too.

In that case, you’re right.

Woaw! Again! Cool avatar! Another girl in the rain, crying I presume. Long black hair. Monochrome just like your last one. Can’t quite make out the rest. How many has that been? Three in a row, I believe, with rain?

You’re a theme girl, aren’t you Arc? I remember your green eyes line of avatars. One of them was even crying IIRC. You had a couple anime ones before the rain, didn’t you? I think even the first rain one overlapped with the anime theme.

Ah, the phases we go through. The avatars people choose can sometimes be a little window into the pit stops and the scenery they visit on their life’s journey.

But anyway, back to meaning… :arrow_right: :arrow_right: :arrow_right:

Meaning?

Where does that come from?

:laughing:

Hi Arcturus Descending

Same here . . .

:laughing: