How Radical can we be without totally denying the existence/relevance of an outside world?
Von Glassersfeld sounds a lot like a metaphysical realist when you get down to it. If we accept his theories on the basis that he is describing a reality where the mind exists in the world but has a very hard time accessing it, then we may be getting somewhere plausible.
At the very least we need to admit that at some time the mind existed in interaction with the world. If not a mind would never have the initial materials to develop the world from. More fundamentally, if the mind didn't exist in the world then where did the mind come from?
We have to admit the existence of something analogous to the subconscious as well, or else the universe would only be the way that we consciously chose it to be, which is rather painfully not the case.
Von Glassersfeld sounds a lot like a metaphysical realist when you get down to it. If we accept his theories on the basis that he is describing a reality where the mind exists in the world but has a very hard time accessing it, then we may be getting somewhere plausible.
At the very least we need to admit that at some time the mind existed in interaction with the world. If not a mind would never have the initial materials to develop the world from. More fundamentally, if the mind didn't exist in the world then where did the mind come from?
We have to admit the existence of something analogous to the subconscious as well, or else the universe would only be the way that we consciously chose it to be, which is rather painfully not the case.
No comments:
Post a Comment