Www.referat.ro Rflect.doc8a191

  • Uploaded by: Justin Bennett
  • 0
  • 0
  • June 2020
  • PDF

This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA


Overview

Download & View Www.referat.ro Rflect.doc8a191 as PDF for free.

More details

  • Words: 1,019
  • Pages: 12
Reflection on the idea of nothing On the reference of the idea of nothing It seems to me that there can be no absolute nothing. Arguments: •an idea is not nothing; indeed, every posible cognitive system is material and, therefore, is a function of matter; it is something material: as a material state of a material system; therefore, until we have any idea, the absolute nothing cannot be. • on the other hand, if the quantity of energy from universe is

constant, that is, if energy cannot be destroyed, but only transformed from a state in an another state, than outer nothing cannot be, therefore absolute nothing cannot be, that is nothing both inside and outside, cannot be. If the empty space is indestructible, than the same it holds. On the content of the idea of nothing By our experience of relative nothing(e.g., an empty box or by the experince of relative destruction) we can arrive, by mental operations, at the idea of absolute nothing, by extension. Or by thinking at a continuously reduction of a cognitive content of an idea(e.g., we can arrive until the

idea of 0). As we can arrive at the idea of infinit...That is, by increasing continuously somehow an cognitive content. But, any idea in order to be understooded should to have a content. Thus, idea of nothing cannot be understooded without starting or relating it with something positive content. 0 is understooded relative to quantity. The empty can be understooded only relative to matter or physical and space. That is why, the idea of nothing have, however, a content...it is not merely negation, in addition is the negation of all that is . On the other hand, we must to understand that the idea of nothing

is something material, is a material state of a material system. Only together it is inteligible. ~ single have not any meaning. Even single, ~ have a content, although not a meaningful content. On the other hand, we must to understand that the idea of nothing is something material, is a material state of a material system. Therefore, the idea of nothing does not involve an ideatic nothing. However, we can think somehow at the idea of absolute nothing positive content, but this idea is not contentempty. We can anticipate the idea of

absolute nothing, but we cannot arrive to it... My fundamental idea is that

there can be no absolute empty-content idea But, the content can come from many sensorial systems, not only from visual system. And, many animals have contents. I think that, that there are animals with better senses than humans... That is, why mental opertations/processings/computation s are very important.

As was argued by Quartz and Sejnowsky in The neural basis of cognitive development , evolution of cognition lead to a more flexible capacity of forming free representation...but, as they argue, development also involve an increase of the complexity of representations...not a reduction to nothing... Therefore, a depeer understanding of everithing involve more logical/scientific/rational coerence of all that is from bothom to top. Nothing cannot increase the inteligibility. I fear that idea of nothing is a sterile one. Metaphysics=chemistry. Metachemistry=biology.

Over there idea of nothing About the relation between any posible mind and human brain 1.Human brain is a concretmaterialisation of an ontologically posible system. 2.The set of all the posible systems depend on the properties of ontological primitive/primitives, on their numerical quantity, on the trans-contextual conditions and on the specific contextual conditions. 2* The relations are determined by the nature of relates and by other contextual parameters. 3. An ontologically posible mind is not a product of human brain, but it is a human discovery.

4. The posible minds, the properties of ontologicall primitive/primitives, the laws of univers, are not products of human mind;their existence is not conditionated by humans; humans cannot exist if they would not exist; they had existed before the life apparition and can to exist if life would no longer exist. 5. The posibility of human brain is implicated by the properties of ontological primitive/primitives, by their sufficient quantity and by some specific contextual conditions. 6. What is physically posible do not depend at all on the imagination of brain, but only on the universal and local physical constraints.

7. Implementation of a certain ontologically posible mind may be not independent of human brain, but what is ontologically posible in every context in space and time will never depend on human brain. 8. Question: What is the necessary level of univers? Is there something indestructible in Univers? We can to conceive the whole space being empty. But, we cannot to imagine something aspatial. 9. Is there something more primitive than the empty space in univers? 10. Is there something that would can affect the space itself?

As a kind of conclusion Neither science nor animal cognition, evolutionarily speaking, do not begin with the nothingcontent, but with some content, at least a sensorial content. We do not start from nothingcontent, but we anticipate this idea starting from some content. More than simplity we want inteligibility, and this involve not only isolates primitives, but also relations, structures, processes etc. We should to arrive not to the idea of nothing, but to the coerence of the whole existence...to the understanding of all that is. And this is not thanks to the idea of nothing.

Humans and the whole existence will never participate toward idea of nothing. Neither are we started, nor we should to arrive at the idea of nothing. We should to arrive at the understandig of all that is, all that was, all that will be and finally to understanding all that can be and all that cannot be; to an ultimate but coerent understanding of all ...and to the discovery of those posibities that will make we happy. Not to nothing. Neither simplity nor economy is our ultimate and necessary scientific and philosophical aims. By science we want primarly understanding and secondly happiness. The lather

involve extension of life quantity and quality. The lather involve justice& love&peace&freedom&power and maybe others. Powered by http://www.referat.ro/ cel mai complet site cu referate

More Documents from "Justin Bennett"