on medialens cogitations
On what is a car. Should one not look at the functions of an object that is a combination of components. If a car is not able to do its primary function and has lost its primary characteristics namely drive people somewhere it is not a car anymore. Of course there are stages of loosing a function or characteristics because in many cases it is still able to perform its functions partly or it still has the structure and outlook of a car?
Should one not think in the trend of that something is my mental representation of an object or observation of my part? Where the observation may be a representation of something real or only illusive?
When this observation of a structure is real does this structure not constitute an existence? When one looks at nature everything physical constitutes a form of structured mass. From atoms to planets. If I ask what is a planet. It constitutes many sub-structures but being themselves in a structured form that allows me to say it is a planet. If the definition of a planet is a good one that fits this structure.
The problem is also that my ability to observe something with my senses is still only a limited one; so illusions will always be there. But there is also a chance that something is real.
And another one is that in a universe which constantly changes, the meaning of some word changes with it. For example the person Tjerk I am now is not the person Tjerk I was yesterday or last year. But still people will tell me your name is Tjerk just for the convenience. To be absolutely clear of something would mean to add a lot of words that characterize me better, but those were probably infinite and still not really precise. Or define yourself every day anew.
Language in itself is rather inefficient to describe something real, I guess.
What the English Soccer team is is quite simple. The team that plays soccer on a specific time, in the name of a country. When I am happy when it wins it means I have some empathy for this team because they seam to be representing me on the field and everybody has a tendency to want to win. Wether this feeling of them representing me is a correct one and has some realism is a totally different matter. It probably is not because it is mainly a historical construct that has the feeling of something real. I always think that soccer somehow has replaced war. It is easy to understand for someone sitting at home. One has the feeling to get sucked into it and at the end no-one especially me gets hurt. And real wars are not real wars when you watch them on television they have become more something like a video game, which has similar criteria as soccer.
Well anyway that is just some of my strange views,
Hope it keeps thinking
Tjerk
Should one not think in the trend of that something is my mental representation of an object or observation of my part? Where the observation may be a representation of something real or only illusive?
When this observation of a structure is real does this structure not constitute an existence? When one looks at nature everything physical constitutes a form of structured mass. From atoms to planets. If I ask what is a planet. It constitutes many sub-structures but being themselves in a structured form that allows me to say it is a planet. If the definition of a planet is a good one that fits this structure.
The problem is also that my ability to observe something with my senses is still only a limited one; so illusions will always be there. But there is also a chance that something is real.
And another one is that in a universe which constantly changes, the meaning of some word changes with it. For example the person Tjerk I am now is not the person Tjerk I was yesterday or last year. But still people will tell me your name is Tjerk just for the convenience. To be absolutely clear of something would mean to add a lot of words that characterize me better, but those were probably infinite and still not really precise. Or define yourself every day anew.
Language in itself is rather inefficient to describe something real, I guess.
What the English Soccer team is is quite simple. The team that plays soccer on a specific time, in the name of a country. When I am happy when it wins it means I have some empathy for this team because they seam to be representing me on the field and everybody has a tendency to want to win. Wether this feeling of them representing me is a correct one and has some realism is a totally different matter. It probably is not because it is mainly a historical construct that has the feeling of something real. I always think that soccer somehow has replaced war. It is easy to understand for someone sitting at home. One has the feeling to get sucked into it and at the end no-one especially me gets hurt. And real wars are not real wars when you watch them on television they have become more something like a video game, which has similar criteria as soccer.
Well anyway that is just some of my strange views,
Hope it keeps thinking
Tjerk
posted by Tjerk at 8:36 AM
|
