98 replies to this topic

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

Let me ask you this, then: Do you still insist that this principle, "things are observable," an observable fact?

Yes, because to realize that you have awareness to observe is itelf an observation.

Your statement that "Facts do not self-evidently tell us to observe them. We must first form a logical construct that insist on their observability and the need to observe them." doesn't fit the reality of the case. We don't need "a logical construct that insist on their observability" We observe simply because we can through instinct. To know that we can is not logic, it is also part of instinct that constitute observation.

However, that is not my original argument at all. You said "What really gave me a kneejerk is your statement "logic without an observable basis is just a load of c**p." This is itself an apriori logical judgement. The pure facts of the event structure of the world doesn't self-evidently tell us that -- we decide that by logic before we approach facts." However, the definition of logic is the art of good reasoning or kind of thinking that aims at a conclusion. It is done from deductive resoning. You do not need deductive reasoning to observe, it is an instinct of which observation is inherently part of. The fact is, all logic in this world is first applied to a premise based on observation. Or else it is useless.

Edited by warhead, 12 March 2006 - 04:37 PM.

[MengTzu]

Yes, because to realize that you have awareness to observe is itelf an observation.

This doesn't solve the dilemma at all. Empiricism still requires a premise, and empiricism cannot be its own premise. This is the ultimate problem with what you're saying here.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

This doesn't solve the dilemma at all. Empiricism still requires a premise, and empiricism cannot be its own premise. This is the ultimate problem with what you're saying here.

Whats the problem? I never said observation has no premise. But its premise is not logic. Its instinct. And observation is an inherent part of instinct. To put it simply, no observation = no knowledge, hence no logic. When you start to question anything, it means that you alreay observed the fact for you to question it in the first place, to start thinking you have awareness is an observation.

[MengTzu]

Whats the problem? I never said observation has no premise. But its premise is not logic. Its instinct. And observation is an inherent part of instinct. To put it simply, no observation = no knowledge, hence no logic. When you start to question anything, it means that you alreay observed the fact for you to question it in the first place, to start thinking you have awareness is an observation.

I find it questionable to call it instinct. The act of observation is instinctual, but a premise is not the same as an instinctual tendency. A premise is a principle, a reason. The instinctual tendency to observe is not the same as the principle "things are observable."

[LYY]

And observation is an inherent part of instinct. To put it simply, no observation = no knowledge, hence no logic.

That can be partly explained by the Triadic Model of Earth-Man-Heaven:

1.Earth-Earth
2.Earth-Man
3.Man-Heaven
4.Man-Earth
5.Heaven-Man
6.Heaven-Heaven

"Observation" is the domain of "Man-Heaven" and "Man-Earth".

Man-Heaven is about emotional preference, selection (with preference biases) ...
Man-Earth is about processing of data, analysis and evaluation.

A good example is how a girl selects her boy friend.
She may have to go thru an emotional period in selecting a right candidate. Then she has to "evaluate" the candidate.

This is first part of the story.

The second part is the time factor.
Different time frame may give different observation results.

So, in the case of selecting a right man, a smart girl may go thru an iteration of 3<->4 and 4<->3 before final desicion.

[BlueDragonMagik]

That can be partly explained by the Triadic Model of Earth-Man-Heaven:

1.Earth-Earth
2.Earth-Man
3.Man-Heaven
4.Man-Earth
5.Heaven-Man
6.Heaven-Heaven

"Observation" is the domain of "Man-Heaven" and "Man-Earth".

Man-Heaven is about emotional preference, selection (with preference biases) ...
Man-Earth is about processing of data, analysis and evaluation.

A good example is how a girl selects her boy friend.
She may have to go thru an emotional period in selecting a right candidate. Then she has to "evaluate" the candidate.

This is first part of the story.

The second part is the time factor.
Different time frame may give different observation results.

So, in the case of selecting a right man, a smart girl may go thru an iteration of 3<->4 and 4<->3 before final desicion.

I have never heard of that in terms of combining the three "essentials" {Earth-Earth, Earth-Man, Man-Heaven, Man-Earth Heaven-Man, and Heaven-Heaven. ... That is a great concept that I have never heard of. ... But it really makes sense. ...
... What does { Heaven-Earth, Heaven-Man, Earth-Earth, Earth-Man (etc)} means? ...

Edited by BlueDragonMagik, 15 March 2006 - 02:47 AM.

[LYY]

I have never heard of that in terms of combining the three "essentials" {Earth-Earth, Earth-Man, Man-Heaven, Man-Earth Heaven-Man, and Heaven-Heaven. ... That is a great concept that I have never heard of. ... But it really makes sense. ...

http://www.anton-hey...ures/index.html

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

I find it questionable to call it instinct. The act of observation is instinctual, but a premise is not the same as an instinctual tendency. A premise is a principle, a reason. The instinctual tendency to observe is not the same as the principle "things are observable."

Yet it still ultimately derive from the act of observation.

[Wu Wang]

Let first understand that Daoism and Dao can be the same yet it is two different concepts or principles.

Dao represent what Lau Zi teaching in the Dao De Jin. But Daoism have further itself away from the teaching of Lau Zi. You can find the deviation from many of their pratices...

From the Dao De Jin, Lau Zi said Dao is the way, the truth and the life. Unless you know what is Dao you don't know LIFE.

For those understand Dao De Jin, Lau Zi spoke there are two realm one is the higher realm and the other is the lower realm. You can call the higher realm one as Tian Dao as for the lower one... as long as you're not in the higher one you are at the lower one.

Dao De Jin also define the Mandate of Heaven. What happen to the Mandate of Heaven now? The Mandate of Heaven that Zhou Wen Wang and Zhou Wu Wang had lived out even into a Kingdom? Since 1911 Mandate of Heaven have been so call completely destoryed! In the hand not of our enemy but ourselves, by the children and descendant of our fore-fathers and fore-mothers, Yan Huang Zi Sun.

Anyway what I want to shared here is unless we restore this Mandate we will never understand what is LIFE and not talking about what is Dao.

People will jumb to conclusion that I want to restore the emperorship! The answer is no cos if you do not have it inside you even if the emperorship of China is restore it will fall again very soon. I am emphaising on having it inside you and living it out. That's more important. Did Kong Zi and Lau Zi become emperor by writing all these. No. But BY LIVING it out they have considered at the level of Sage.

To conclude, Dao is not the ultimate principle but Dao is the only WAY. Dao is the truth, the way and the LIFE.

In my limitation of knowledge, I hope my humble sharing have expressed something new to all here in the forum.