|
Post by nixusy on Sept 28, 2021 19:47:04 GMT
Quotes from Arthur Schopenhauer
|
|
|
Post by nixusy on Sept 28, 2021 20:01:51 GMT
“The process by which children, and persons who are born blind and have been operated on, learn to see; single vision of whatever is perceived with two eyes; double vision and double touch, occurring when the organs of sense are displaced from their usual position; the upright appearance of objects, whereas their image in the eye is inverted; the attributing of color to external objects, whereas it is merely an inner function, a division, through polarization, of the activity in the eye; and finally also the stereoscope; all these are solid and irrefutable proofs that all perception is not only of the senses, but of the intellect; in other words, PURE KNOWLEDGE THROUGH THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE CAUSE FROM THE EFFECT. Consequently, it presupposes the law of causality, and on the knowledge of this depends all perception, and therefore all experience, by virtue of its primary and entire possibility. The converse, namely that knowledge of the causal law results from experience, is not the case; this was the skepticism of Hume, and is first refuted by what is here said. For the independence of the knowledge of causality from all experience, in other words, it’s a priori character, can alone be demonstrated from the dependence of all experience on it. Again, this can be done only by proving, in the manner here indicated, and explained in the passages above referred to, that the knowledge of causality is already contained in the perception generally, in the domain of which all all experience is to be found, and hence that it exists wholly a priori in respect of experience, that it does not presuppose experience, but is presupposed thereby as a condition.”
Interpretation of this?
|
|
|
Post by IW on Oct 28, 2021 7:56:26 GMT
I have looked at your quote a few times, thinking on the interpretation possibility. Is this Arthur Shopenhauer a scientist? A philosopher or what? Could you share some info on him?
Your choice of caps on pure knowledge through understanding, would be absolutely correct if left to this as a statement imo. But to add (the cause from effect) is indeed a "perception".. perception being something personal and individual based on personality, life experiences, family upbringing etc.
This causality being contained imo in the "intent" of the person which influences or contains the perception...
I think of a child who defends themselves by a falsity due to their feeling things are not fair. This being their perception which creates their experience and gives them a sense of righteousness for their behavior. As far as what the "eyes" see, again we see what we want to see, not always true or right.
Anyhow just some thoughts on your brief paragraph excerpt.. wish you the best nixusy.
|
|