Experience is all that can be related to. Is it possible to disprove that experience is all there is?
If not, what psychological consequences might follow?
have you ever experienced the perfect line? no
can you relate to one? yes
relations (language) are a game unto themselves and experiences exist outside relations…
-Imp
Please tell me how you think you can relate to a “perfect line”.
In mathematics, a “perfect line” is an absolutely straight, and infinitely long line without breadth or depth. First off, you cannot relate to anything without breadth or depth - just try to imagine it. Secondly, you cannot relate to something infinitely long (or anything infinite, for that matter) - just try to imagine it. Remains absolute straightness. You can think you can imagine this! Just imagine drawing a line between two points with a ruler - perfectly straight! Or looking at the horizon on a level ground - perfectly straight! Needless to say, the illusion of perfect straightness is due to a limitation of your experience, a simplification by your senses of a being similar to a “being identical”…
No, I cannot relate to the perfect line. I can (try to) imagine the perfect line by relating to my experience of an imperfect line.
Please tell me how you think you can relate to a “perfect line”.
you related to one perfectly
-Imp
thus you relate to it… your imperfect line is related to an unexperienced perfect line otherwise you wouldn’t understand that it is imperfect.
-Imp
But what is perfect, i.e., straight? Merriam-Webster has the following entry for “straight” in the literal sense:
So, in order to relate to “straight” in the first sense, we need only know what curves, bends, angles, and irregularities are. But in the entry for the second literal sense, we really see what “straightness” in math is built on:
“generated by a point moving continuously in the [b]same[/b] direction and expressed by a linear [b]equation[/b]”
On the idea of sameness! And, as I’ve said before, the illusion of perfect straightness is due to a limitation of your experience, a simplification by your senses of a being similar to a “being identical”…
perfect is a standard beyond experience against which one measures all imperfect things…
as I said in the first place "relations (language) are a game unto themselves and experiences exist outside relations… "
-Imp
I can write the words ‘perfect’ and ‘line’. That doesn’t mean I can relate to the perfect line. I can relate to my imagination of the perfect line, which is based on relation to an imperfect line. I have still only related to experience.
no, you have the definitions (meanings) of perfect and line and that’s all you have. your sensory impressions are something else entirely. and outside of your impressions is a belief in a thing in itself which is never experienced.
you are still playing with the definitions and the definitions are all with which one plays.
-Imp
My definitions would obviously have no capacity to cause a relation of any kind if I had no sensory impressions to relate them to. Or are you a Platonist?
no, your definitions have relation to themselves. sensory impressions are something else entirely. especially when the definiton is of an unsensed thing.
platonist? nope…
-Imp
Not sensory impressions, experience. Thoughts count as experience.
Does that change your conclusion?
nope. the thoughts you claim are “experience” are nothing but imagination…
-Imp
So you don’t experience your imagination?
???
If it helps to illustrate the point at all, numbers are a great example of our inability to accurately comprehend things outside of our everday experience and perspective.
Many people refuse to believe evolution, often because they don’t think even with billions of years, something could spring forth and become what we are.
When we here the word billions, millions, thousands, etc., people don’t actually comprehend the number. Any number past a certain threshhold, which turns out to be very low, just becomes “a big number” in our minds when we hear it. We don’t actually comprehend that number.
Similarly, we hear concepts such as infinity, or what a line is, and although we have a vague idea of what the definitions imply, it’s just not possible to accurately imagine it in our minds. It just becomes “another big number” past the threshhold of our experience.
Although I understand your point, I do not completely agree, or share the experience.
When I think of the history of our planet, estimated to be 5 billion years, I think in phases of context. First, human history, a small fraction of it, but the most complex - so, when all ‘event’s’ are taken to take up time, the fraction is not so small after all, compared to the eventless stretch of time that it took the landmasses to be formed. Time is relatve, is I guess what this confirmes.
not in the same way as you experience sensory perception or emotional states… totally different things… confusing them is an error…
-Imp
Totally different experiences. But experiences nontheless.