|existentialism ° art ° poetry ° exquisite corpse ° chat ° search engine|
|( the cry ) Philosophy Discussion Board|
Posted by blimp on Friday, November 01, 2002 at 19:44:48 :
In Reply to: Re: 3. What possible heirarchies of perspective are there? posted by Wordsmith on Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 20:04:46 :
: : : : define perspective: do you subjective frame of reference? why need there be hierarchies? a hierarchy is an ordering according to importance. how do we attach value to a perspective?
: : : Good questions all. Well, perspectives *are*
: : : valueble, aren't they? They have value by the very fact they exist. We'd know nothing
: : : without them.
: : :
: : : : also, W: was reading recently that the Universe before the big bang existed in 26 dimensions, then split into 2 universes, one of 4 dimensions (ours) and one of six dimensions. somewhere out there are a group of six dimensional philosophers wondering how phenomenology would work in four dimensions... :P
: : : How could *any* dimensions have existed "before" the BB? Dimensions exist
: : : in space. Both time and space came into being *with* the BB. Time and space could not have existed before they existed.
: : : Wordsmith :)
: : Time and Space "as we know them" were born at the BB but there had to be something before the BB in order for there to have been a BB ie, something to BANG! But yes, I expressed it poorly. The book was on String Theory and one idea was that time and space were folded in on themselves in 26 dimensions at t0... etc.
: Fine, but that "something", whatever it was,
: had to have existed within some sort of container. Are you positing a container that's not a container? Why 26? Who came up with that number?
: : Also, simply because perspectives may be "necessary" does not necessarily make them "valuable" in the sense that one can be placed above another (as is implied in any hierarchy). Besides, a hierarchy is already a form of "perspective" - an ordering according to perceived value/importance.
: No, but they are valuable in the "the very fact they exist make them useful to us" sense. Of that there can be no doubt.
: Wordsmith :)
W: "Hyperspace: Adventures in the Tenth Dimension", Michio Kaku - check it out for a detailed explanation if you want one. The idea is more mathematical than philosophical and I only mentioned it because of your comment re. dimensions/perceptions. Still, worth a look if you're up for a mind-fuck.
Also, if we define perspective as, say, an abstract conclusion or interpretation of "things" based upon our perception of "them", then the perspective does not "exist" in the sense that the "thing" perceived exists. Rather, it is "created" by the mind as a rubric, a tool to be used in forming judgements or a platform on which to base actions. In this sense it has "use-value" just as a hammer or a screwdriver has a use-value. My point is that no one perspective is any MORE valuable than any other, just as the hammer is no MORE important than the screwdriver, and so a "hierarchy" of perspective is a non-sense.
Post a Followup