Comments by "Peter deWolf" (@StoneShards) on "Pursuit of Wonder" channel.

  1. "What we hold to be true is impossible to ever prove"? That's not especially important. "What do we know; and how do we know?" We can only know what we've experienced; experience is a whole-being imprint of state awareness--you'll thank the imprint later! hahaha...Oh, but next is the intro to the treatment of "the problem of critierion": "For the avoidance of confusion here, we can consider something knowledge if it is a justified, true belief", at which point the video continues blithely on, as if that could be possible after such a lame definition of "knowledge"! "Knowledge is a true belief that is justified"--are you kidding me! The three critical terms of this "definition" are "true", "belief", and "justified"! And the stated purpose of this obfuscation is the "avoidance of confusion"! hahaha...ok, let's see where this mess is going...I don't think it will necessary to continue for the remaining ten minutes.
    1
  2. "What is the point of philosophy if we can never prove...anything for sure...?" Philosophy is the love of wisdom, the point being to pursue wisdom. Philosophy is a contextualization of that love. Symbolic logic diverted philosophy from its proper course into a self-referential mode...a tail-chasing mode. If you properly define your terms you don't end up with such a mess. These "paradoxes" are paradoxical because your lexicon is self-referential. Start at the beginning: your body. This is where experience roots. From the moment of your birth event, your physiology has generated raw experience, of temperature, pressure, humidity, light, sound, taste, smell, and sensation. We only need to recognize the hierarchical nature of order to accept that experience complexifies by the hierarchical action of order. The sensations the newborn experiences would be maddening if not for the complexification that appears as "habituation", where the body "learns" to ignore what it learns is "background noise", not conveying useful information. You don't "feel" the full sensation available from the hairs on your arm, for instance--you've become habituated to it. Self-conscious awareness is where we live and have our experience of being. The primary active tools available to awareness (the Tao) are "intention" (Yang) and "attention" (Yin). This is what you have to work with. You, in your Awareness, govern the interplay of intention and attention. Everything associates, either sympathetically or antipathetically; this association is the basis for complexification. Attention notices associations; intention relates associations to each other, engendering ratiocination. At birth, the little snowball that was you began rolling downhill, gathering more snow and growing larger and moving with greater momentum, associating and complexifying all the way, as directed by the interplay of attention and intention, under the watchful, wisdom-gathering, eye of the Awareness that is you to yourself.
    1
  3. There's a problem with logic: the logical principle of negation is only locally valid. That is, you may design a context in which negation is valid, but, in the relatively larger context, it won't be. "Nothing cannot exist"! "Nothingness" cannot be contextualized outside of a relatively narrow context. I have five apples; you take away two of them, and I have three apples. But outside this narrow context, all five apples still exist; the two apples have not ceased to exist--even if you ate one of them! hahaha...when working with negation watch your contexts carefully...
    1