... G. Rubino wrote: ta asks: Are thoughtsthings? That is, are they substantial? ... to accept the idea of non-thingness that is spirit, soul, or mind. Thoughts are as substantial as thinkers' ... confused with the reality they reflect. Thoughts *are* the only reality, aren't ... inside world may contain an "imaginative" thought that has no immediate correspondence with ...
ta asks: Are thoughtsthings? That is, are they substantial? Not in a physical sense of thingness like rocks, but it's difficult for some to accept the idea of non-thingness that is spirit, soul, or mind. Thoughts are as substantial as thinkers' consciousness. ... our inside world may contain an "imaginative" thought that has no immediate correspondence with anything...
...wrote: RaaN wrote: Perhap impermananece is too weak a term. Non persistence might be better. Nothing can be said to persist for any duration at all since all things change. Thus conceived then even duration is an illusion since there cannot properly be said to be any continuity within which anything can even be considered temporary. Even the illusion of ...
... holds that all the abstract thoughts are already there, waiting to ... by somebody. "Thinking is thought-grasping." (Frege) Thoughts, as propositions, are ... between qualia, feelings, perceptions. primitive thoughts, conceptions and propositions. I'm...abstract objects such as Fregean thoughts aren't abstractions in the...if there are any such things, qualia (http://plato.stanford.edu...
...had a marked bias in favor of things or substances. However, another variant line of thought was also ...all, the concentration on [perduring] physical things as existents in nature slights the ...offers. Secondly, Aristotle says that general things, like species and genera, depend on ... being basic and particular; for material things have other characteristics. For one thing,...
... suspect that anything substantial about his thoughts would be different? They are in... use as remnants of Paine's thoughts. The electrical fields and chemical ...time would we say that thoughts are things? It seems like it... ...like vibrating fields interacting than substantial things making contact (i.e.. a ball...the illusion of solidity because other things vibrate so much weaker? Wrong? ...
...>how could I demonstrate that thoughts are substantial; I could do ... that anything substantial about his thoughts would be different? They are ... how to demonstrate substance for things in the past with no ... as remnants of Paine's thoughts. The electrical fields and chemical... be of someone else's thoughts. In any event the relationship...a text to an original thought is complex at best. Ed...
> RaaN wrote: Perhap impermananece is too weak a term. Non persistence might be better. Nothing can be said to persist for any duration at all since all things change. Thus conceived then even duration is an illusion since there cannot properly be said to be any continuity within which anything can even be considered temporary. Even the illusion of permanence or ...
...wrote: I agree. I was caught up in the idea of how could I demonstrate that thoughts are substantial; I could do that for someone thinking now, but I don't see how I ... i.e., his body, is in the past. Why would you suspect that anything substantial about his thoughts would be different? They are in the past too. Tony, philosopher http://www.geocities.com/trisector/ So ...
.... Everything you see was originally a 'thought'...sometimes a dream. Whose thoughts created the Tsunami that killed all those people? All people die....You said everything was originally a thought -- a tsunami qualifies as a subset...". So my question was, who thought the tsnumai into existence, and why? Is that a thought that is looking for an answer, ...
