The Unperceived: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Metaphysics and Epistemology » The Unperceived » The Unperceived

The Unperceived

Page: 1 2

The Unperceived

Poor Yorick
Ex Nihilo Philosopher

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 28, 2003
Location: Alpha Quadrant
Total Topics: 54
Total Posts: 344

Posted 02/10/04 - 01:10 AM:	#1
I've heard the argument: If you can give me an example of something unperceived, you are currently perceiving it, so it's not unperceived. So if you can't give me an example of something unperceived, there's no proof of anything unperceived. Do you think there unperceived things, even though there's no proof of them? I was thinking that people in the 10th century never perceived of the Internet, but it does exist tho... or does time play a role in unperception? or ahh my brain hurts..
I perhaps did right in submitting my aphorism to a systematic appraiser. Perhaps something may come of it, a footnote in [a philosophical system] -- great idea! Then I would not have lived in vain! - Søren Kierkegaard I am so stupid that I cannot understand philosophy; the antithesis of this is that philosophy is so clever that it cannot comprehend my stupidity. These antitheses are mediated in a higher unity: in our common stupidity. - Søren Kierkegaard

Gassendi1
banned

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Total Topics: 152
Total Posts: 11022

Posted 02/10/04 - 08:56 AM:	#2
Poor Yorick wrote: I've heard the argument: If you can give me an example of something unperceived, you are currently perceiving it, so it's not unperceived. So if you can't give me an example of something unperceived, there's no proof of anything unperceived. Do you think there unperceived things, even though there's no proof of them? I was thinking that people in the 10th century never perceived of the Internet, but it does exist tho... or does time play a role in unperception? or ahh my brain hurts.. ____________________________________________________ To think of something as perceived is not to perceive it. Right now I am thinking of my friend Bob. But I am not perceiving Bob. Besides, there are unperceivable things: like the invisible man.

manueldavid
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 14

Posted 02/10/04 - 03:12 PM:	#3
Remember Plato, those are ideas not entities. And remember Einstein, time is relative, there´s no future and no past. Thank you.

123
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 27, 2002
Total Topics: 12
Total Posts: 46

Posted 02/11/04 - 04:20 AM:	#4
To think of something as perceived is not to perceive it. Right now I am thinking of my friend Bob. But I am not perceiving Bob. Besides, there are unperceivable things: like the invisible man. Hypothetically, the unpercieved can exist. But can the existence of anything that isn't percieved be confirmed? That's what this thread seems to be asking. Empirically the answer is no, but logically the unpercieved can in some cases be proved. The question is what you trust, do you trust experience? Do you presume that the unpercieved can't be logically impossible?

Gassendi1
banned

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Total Topics: 152
Total Posts: 11022

Posted 02/11/04 - 10:46 AM:	#5
123 wrote: Hypothetically, the unpercieved can exist. But can the existence of anything that isn't percieved be confirmed? That's what this thread seems to be asking. Empirically the answer is no, but logically the unpercieved can in some cases be proved. The question is what you trust, do you trust experience? Do you presume that the unpercieved can't be logically impossible? ___________________________________________________________ We have confirmed the existence of electons, but they cannot perceived. And we have confirmed the existence of Julius Ceasar. But no one now living has ever perceived Julius Ceasar.

Archangel
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 03, 2003
Location: Earth (mostly)
Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 261

Posted 02/11/04 - 11:27 AM:	#6
Poor Yorick wrote: I've heard the argument: If you can give me an example of something unperceived, you are currently perceiving it, so it's not unperceived. So if you can't give me an example of something unperceived, there's no proof of anything unperceived. Do you think there unperceived things, even though there's no proof of them? I was thinking that people in the 10th century never perceived of the Internet, but it does exist tho... or does time play a role in unperception? or ahh my brain hurts.. You should state what you are 'percieving' with. Your physical eyes or your mind. Also one should not confuse percieve with concieve. I can (believe it or not) concieve purple cows on Mars yet I am unable to percieve them. Also, as far as I know, Dark Matter has still not been percieved either. Concieve is to create, while percieve is to communicate with what is created. Thus you can percieve a thought. Because 'percieve' implies communication it also thus implies space. Space involves time, so there is probably a time connection in perception. Signals can't travel faster than light. I think Alain Aspect in 1982 performed an experiment which implied that somehow faster than light communication was possible under some circumstances. Maybe it was instantaneous perception. People of the 10th century probably never percieved a computer and thus never concieved the Internet. Yet they probably did have some notion of a 'network of communication that spans the known spheres of human existence'.
Confusion will be my epitaph...

Kainte
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 14, 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Total Topics: 4
Total Posts: 20

Posted 02/11/04 - 09:31 PM:	#7
Perception is an individual attribute in relation to himself, others, or the world around him. This perception is either empirical perception or rational perception, and the perception of unperceived concepts would be in the latter category. But as Archangel said, you can't perceive unperceived concepts without conceiving them, then you're just perceiving the conceived. Everything exists in it's chemistry format and does simply that, exist. Time and space are among these things, and our conscious is outside this realm. When we conceive something, we might as well be creating a realm outside the universe, but the problem with conceptions is that they have to remain, unfortunately, empirical. Basically, you can only perceive concepts, whether these concepts exist in our universe or conceived in our minds, it matters not. Therefore our perceptions have to start from empirical bases, and rationality can exist later. Fairly simple.

Gassendi1
banned

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Total Topics: 152
Total Posts: 11022

Posted 02/12/04 - 01:38 AM:	#8
Kainte wrote: Perception is an individual attribute in relation to himself, others, or the world around him. This perception is either empirical perception or rational perception, and the perception of unperceived concepts would be in the latter category. But as Archangel said, you can't perceive unperceived concepts without conceiving them, then you're just perceiving the conceived. Everything exists in it's chemistry format and does simply that, exist. Time and space are among these things, and our conscious is outside this realm. When we conceive something, we might as well be creating a realm outside the universe, but the problem with conceptions is that they have to remain, unfortunately, empirical. Basically, you can only perceive concepts, whether these concepts exist in our universe or conceived in our minds, it matters not. Therefore our perceptions have to start from empirical bases, and rationality can exist later. Fairly simple. _________________________________________________ You may be using "perceive" in a way unknown to me, but one dictionary defines it as: verb: to become aware of through the senses (Example: "I could perceive the ship coming over the horizon") So, I don't think that anyone has ever perceived a concept since we do not become aware of concepts through our senses, although we do learn about concepts (as we learn about everything else) through our senses.

Radrook
banned

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 11, 2002
Total Topics: 12
Total Posts: 1714

Posted 02/16/04 - 02:35 PM:	#9
From a Christian viewpoint all things are perceived since God perceives them. So within this context we can never say that there are things existing which are unperceived. In fact, there was a philosopher who claimed rather illogically that in order for the universe to exist at all it must be ALWAYS perceived. On a more logical note, we can definitely say that there are things which humans as yet have not perceived in a particular fashion. For example, the light from the Andromeda galaxy takes millions of years to get to us. We can definitely say that the llight as yet to arrive in millions of years is unperceived. All this is assuming, of course, that there is an external world and that we are not generating all the things perceived all by ourselves. But that's another story.

Dont Know
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 11, 2003
Location: Maine
Total Topics: 4
Total Posts: 425

Posted 02/16/04 - 03:37 PM:	#10
Gassendi1 wrote: ___________________________________________________________ We have confirmed the existence of electons, but they cannot perceived. And we have confirmed the existence of Julius Ceasar. But no one now living has ever perceived Julius Ceasar. if you have confirmed the existence of them than i would call that percieving their existence.
"As industry and the arts spread and flower, the scorned cultivator, burdened with taxes necessary for the maintenance of luxury and condemned to spend his life between labor and hunger, abandons his fields to go to the cities in search of the bread he ought to carry there." - Rousseau

Page: 1 2

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.