Ah, true bordem creates these threads..

ok. let me start off by quoting that "human reality and the notions of the world are inseperable"

Jean-paul sarte believed and wrote about how the "natural sciences" ie psychology, and astronomy too i presume, are to strict in its search for the facts of a particular matter and they should look brader and look at things objectively.

Studying things in detail to begin with (as the most concrete part of psychology does) and searching for meaning (in being or the world) through empirical means will not help the "big picture" of true being-in-the-world. Sarte's view of phenomenology as gaining input by an subjective view peering at an obviously objective topic isnt always helpful. but having a point of departure and absolute proximity of the investigator and the thing investigated is important to begin to define being.

What phenomonolgy does is exclude the details in experience that can be restated, (like psycholgy only does) and take the ones that can not be negated and apply it to being. sarte actually tried to include his own spin calling it phenomenological psychology. Its ridiculous but thought prevoking.

Anyway, i know my thought process--writing, doesnt make vertical sense, but if you have any ideas or read any of his, husserl's, or heideggers writings on being it here and share if you will
thanks,
chris

heidegger was a fat bastard who always tried to either grovel before you or kill you with his megaphone... the bastard...

but seriously, i prefer to think of sartres 'ultimate responsibilty'... and thats all i say on that.

because that is really all we do as humans... we take bits and pieces of the collective pool of knowledge and fit it such that it pleases our views of the universe. we that view clashes with anothers reality we either deny or adapt. its that simple.

awe, whatz wrong with heidegger?

i am a firm believer that today is merely mathematical/factual....we can define everything with a scientific approach and state it to be truth, but in reality we merely coat the essence of something with sprinkles of our knowledge....

Mmmmmm....phenomenological donuts.....mmmmm...deliciously said.

play FFVII and find out...

I just cannot be satisfied. damnit scientific facts can be viewed just as sarte viewed psychology, its all just interpretations, doesnt help define or being, well not fast enough for me anway.

It is funny though an example sarte gave, which resembles a premise made by frued.--When you are meeting a friends in a crowded place, you know how you glaze over all other people and things until you are find them. You dont see details, your consciousmind doesnt recognize them before its focused on identifying the people in the room, and making sure their not your friends.

anyway sarte called these subjects you glazed over were in some regard "non-being" or could be considered nothingness. Freud said that these objects were important because of the possiblility to become alive in dreams and psyche. Oh well this is just another small reason to help me appreciate the details in life i suppose.

I've always said that one of the problems with mathamatical and purely scientific views of reality is that they don't take into account the fact that most often we aren't liveing in the outside world we are living in our internalised perceptions of the world..If we weren't we wouldn't know what a fearie was or a dragon etc..and I put religion in the same category of none reality based perceptions. It may very well be real..but only from an individual viewpoint.

Most philosophers have small penises and spend half thier time trying to figure out why the universe jewed them and the other half rutting like hogs in heat.... errr.....

Sartes had a small penis....

penis schmenis.......

.......but was Sartes schmartes?

oh dear gott...

Just kill the thread

Ssecret I think you missed Errant's very fine punn...Gott! As in Gott’s Line..the famous philosopher?..Well I thought it was good!

Are you really into philosophy Ssecret or are you a freud?

I was referring to the penis remarks. cant be serious after that

hehe that was good for a hegel.... hey, i tried

I emerge alone and in anguish confronting the unique and orignial project which constitues my being: all the barriers, all the guard rails collapse nihlated by the consciousness of my freedom...I have to realize the meaning of the world and of my essence; I make my decision cncerning them -without justification and without excuse