Mu-ham-mad
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2012
- Messages
- 288
What is sense?
This seems to be central to the whole idea of what is acceptable in human society: if something can be presented so as to make "sense", then it is acceptable.
This post and - most-likely - every one that follows it, will follow the same pattern -- an attempt to present an opinion in a clear and sensible way -- it could be said that we are appealing to another person's "sense of sense" in everything that we say. (Assuming we are desirous of being taken as a sensible person -- which is the burden of many, myself included).
But what do we really say when we speak, or write? -- I would argue that it is all non-sense -- yet the paradoxes bug me, hence I am asking other people here, and now -- although that doesn't really make any sense at all; since I don't know that their sense and my sense can come together to straighten out these paradoxes: then these paradoxes - by their very nature - can only be hinted at (through this excess of seemingly non-nonsensical gibberish).
Of course, that is disrespectful to the great alchemist from where the term 'gibberish' stems-- and this leads me to an important point:
Logic, rationality, and sense must - of necessity - be different: though we use them interchangeably. The analysis of logic has been done to death by philosophers, and some of it still doesn't make sense.
How can I even make sense of what I am? It is inconceivable, and insensible, that I am even here typing this -- familiarity breeds contempt, and familiarity with "normal-life" is one thing that stops most people from even considering the non-nonsensical nature of their sense -- external, rather than internal. I hope that makes sense but I fear that it will be misconstrued by someone who has a different sense of sense than me -- and possibly dismissed as nonsense - this is what would make sense to me, as would the other logical conclusion of someone finding this more-profound that the gnome sense that it is.
Therein lies the problem; and the question -- but where is the answer?
If every question has an answer -- must some things 'be passed over in silence'? - to quote a 'logical positivist' who met the same accusations of nonsensical word-writing -- I would argue that the label makes less sense than the philosophy - which does make sense to me.
Are these just imagined problems - or do they have a much deeper significance? (as regards the very nature of human thought and expression?).
This seems to be central to the whole idea of what is acceptable in human society: if something can be presented so as to make "sense", then it is acceptable.
This post and - most-likely - every one that follows it, will follow the same pattern -- an attempt to present an opinion in a clear and sensible way -- it could be said that we are appealing to another person's "sense of sense" in everything that we say. (Assuming we are desirous of being taken as a sensible person -- which is the burden of many, myself included).
But what do we really say when we speak, or write? -- I would argue that it is all non-sense -- yet the paradoxes bug me, hence I am asking other people here, and now -- although that doesn't really make any sense at all; since I don't know that their sense and my sense can come together to straighten out these paradoxes: then these paradoxes - by their very nature - can only be hinted at (through this excess of seemingly non-nonsensical gibberish).
Of course, that is disrespectful to the great alchemist from where the term 'gibberish' stems-- and this leads me to an important point:
Logic, rationality, and sense must - of necessity - be different: though we use them interchangeably. The analysis of logic has been done to death by philosophers, and some of it still doesn't make sense.
How can I even make sense of what I am? It is inconceivable, and insensible, that I am even here typing this -- familiarity breeds contempt, and familiarity with "normal-life" is one thing that stops most people from even considering the non-nonsensical nature of their sense -- external, rather than internal. I hope that makes sense but I fear that it will be misconstrued by someone who has a different sense of sense than me -- and possibly dismissed as nonsense - this is what would make sense to me, as would the other logical conclusion of someone finding this more-profound that the gnome sense that it is.
Therein lies the problem; and the question -- but where is the answer?
If every question has an answer -- must some things 'be passed over in silence'? - to quote a 'logical positivist' who met the same accusations of nonsensical word-writing -- I would argue that the label makes less sense than the philosophy - which does make sense to me.
Are these just imagined problems - or do they have a much deeper significance? (as regards the very nature of human thought and expression?).
