@༺པརབྱར།བསངཇ༻ MANY THINGS MUST REMAIN MYSTERIES

THAT IS NOT PROBLEMATIC IN ITSELF

AFTER ALL, WE PROBABLY WOULD NOT UNDERSTAND THEM ANYWAY

DUNNING-KRUGER IS ALSO AN UPPER LIMIT ON THE HUMAN SPECIES

we are boat in a storm that has a little spot light at the front of it that let's us see the waves crash into each other and maybe a water spout in the distance we might want to avoid.

blah blah Dionysus

WE ARE ALSO ABLE TO SEE PATTERNS IN THE WAVES

Blah blah Apollo

THIS IS NOT A LIFE ALONE IN A VOID OF DATA

WE ARE IN FACT AWASH IN IT

THE QUESTION IS PATTERN RECOGNITION

I honestly don't even know what we are talking about at this point

that's why I left the conversation

I was looking at pants on amazon instead, at least that is remotely helpful to my life

We started talking about attitudes and the contents of books but our abstractions grew tentacles of their own and slithered into murky Eldritch swamps

NOT AT ALL

WE ARE STILL ON TOPIC

WE ARE DISCUSSING GERMAN IDEALISM

TRUE NATURE OF HIPPIES REVEALED

Schopenhauer took the middle way. He critiqued Berkeley and Hegel and the materialists

and materialism/idealism are just two autistically extreme polarities that only exist because folk western people decided on a mind/body divide. From there you get spirit and matter and away we go.

NOT IN THE SCHOPENHAUERIAN VIEW

OR THE KANTIAN

THE DIVIDE IS NOT BODY/MIND BUT CAUSE/EFFECT

WITH BOTH BEING IMPORTANT

SCHOPENHAUER MAKES THIS CLEAR

KANT IS LESS CLEAR, BUT IMPLIES IT HEAVILY

WHAT YOU ARE CALLING IDEALISM IS ACTUALLY DUALISM

I haven't defined that yet

idealism is a monism of two options:
1) reductionist - matter is actually the result of mental activity
2) eliminativist - matter doesn't exist there's just mental stuff.

Reverse it for materialism

Dualism is like, `yo dawg there are two independent substances. Dunno how they connect.`

YOU CONFLATE "IDEA" AND "MENTAL ACTIVITY" WHICH IS CLEARLY REJECTED

AND IT IS NOT REDUCTIONISM PER SE TO STATE THAT CAUSE/EFFECT RELATIONSHIPS APPLY TO MATTER AND IDEA

Can we avoid semantics

Like I know you know exactly the thinking I'm trying to put into words here

By that I mean clearly stating stuff that's come up in the history of ideas

IT IS NOT SEMANTICS TO UNDERSTAND A THEORY CORRECTLY, I WOULD THINK

DUALISM POSITS A SEPARATION BETWEEN MATERIAL AND IDEA

yeah

IDEALISM PRESENTS A UNIFIED NOTION, IS THAT CORRECT?