@ It might be the opposite of what she’s talking about at the end, as he outlines the overemphasis on identity beginning in the Romantic era, but she was definitely reminding me of Trueman in the beginning. He’s from the UK, a Christian, and a professor on the east coat of the US. Great book.
We need to move to the next page. A new sense of self. I am a set of a’ priori modes, not a body of limbs and organs. The mind employs a set of a’ priori modes to systemically align and thus, synthesise with the order and symmetry of things. Adding is an obvious mode to most. You can’t add up what I am about to relay without it. We can’t add up the variables of evolution without it. It’s not just there for adding up the pennies in your purse. Categorisation is another mode. We categorically define the world we are of. I categorise adding as a mode of thought. We move in and out of categories continuously. Identification is another mode. Identify the structure of the cell. Identify our root on the evolutionary ladder. Identify categorisation as a mode. We can’t seem to be able to identify our own nature as human in a fixed way. Just can’t ground the predicate. Configuration is another mode. When things don’t figure, it’s because the mind hasn’t combined with the correct configuration. Unification is another mode. To unify what we are searching for. To add it up and unify it. There are many more modes. Considered together as a constellation set; as a concatenation of modes, the mind can be seen as a systemic tool. A tool prior to ego and experience. A tool for systemising and synthesising its place in the order of things as I said. You are employing them right now as you engage with me. This set is in everyone. It is a universal set and thought is impossible without it. Language by extension is impossible without it. From a phenomenological perspective, this set is what we are until we know more. It is this set that allows us to abstract and see that appearances are not what things are. It is this set that allows us to see that the body has no fixed predicate so it is a loose idea at best. In essence, we are a set of systemic modes floating in an ocean of dissipating variables and until we can say more we are that. This set is responsible for all knowledge structures. Science and philosophy are impossible without the systemic lens/eye. Kant employed them to ground his categories. Einstein employed them to ground his perspective and so forth. One ring to rule them all. One eye to systemise it all.
I am glad people are starting to get this. You can't debate and come to an understanding when some view debate as a personal attack.
If you're running a gate on the audio, perhaps consider loosening it up a bit.
See Carl R. Trueman, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self.
@@tedsmusic5556 I will check that out.
@ It might be the opposite of what she’s talking about at the end, as he outlines the overemphasis on identity beginning in the Romantic era, but she was definitely reminding me of Trueman in the beginning. He’s from the UK, a Christian, and a professor on the east coat of the US. Great book.
We need to move to the next page. A new sense of self.
I am a set of a’ priori modes, not a body of limbs and organs.
The mind employs a set of a’ priori modes to systemically align and thus, synthesise with the order and symmetry of things.
Adding is an obvious mode to most. You can’t add up what I am about to relay without it. We can’t add up the variables of evolution without it. It’s not just there for adding up the pennies in your purse.
Categorisation is another mode. We categorically define the world we are of. I categorise adding as a mode of thought. We move in and out of categories continuously.
Identification is another mode. Identify the structure of the cell. Identify our root on the evolutionary ladder. Identify categorisation as a mode. We can’t seem to be able to identify our own nature as human in a fixed way. Just can’t ground the predicate.
Configuration is another mode. When things don’t figure, it’s because the mind hasn’t combined with the correct configuration.
Unification is another mode. To unify what we are searching for. To add it up and unify it.
There are many more modes. Considered together as a constellation set; as a concatenation of modes, the mind can be seen as a systemic tool. A tool prior to ego and experience. A tool for systemising and synthesising its place in the order of things as I said. You are employing them right now as you engage with me.
This set is in everyone. It is a universal set and thought is impossible without it. Language by extension is impossible without it.
From a phenomenological perspective, this set is what we are until we know more. It is this set that allows us to abstract and see that appearances are not what things are. It is this set that allows us to see that the body has no fixed predicate so it is a loose idea at best.
In essence, we are a set of systemic modes floating in an ocean of dissipating variables and until we can say more we are that.
This set is responsible for all knowledge structures. Science and philosophy are impossible without the systemic lens/eye. Kant employed them to ground his categories. Einstein employed them to ground his perspective and so forth. One ring to rule them all. One eye to systemise it all.