James S Saint wrote:True. But the devil is in that 'something'. An idealist says there is no 'something'and mind is ontologically primal, and a materialist says there is a 'something' which is ontologically primal.But actually, both together are true, the material is not inconsistent with the mental.The perspectives are many and various, and each and every one of them reflects a true view of the material. But some perspectives are truer than others.The perspectives of Socrates and Einstein are truer than those of a house mouse and her husband.Belinda wrote:James S Saint wrote Very materialist James! If you inject enough scepticism into your view you see that the existence of subjective perspectives is enough to show that even if there be just one Earth, the perspectives on it are several and various."If everyone sees it differently, then it doesn't exist?"
It seems to me that if everyone sees something, even if differently, then it MUST exist. That means that each of their perspectives is what is false, but what they mis-perceive about must be real.
The existence of subjectivity has no relevance to the objective.
****************
Meleagar wrote
The problem is transferring the motivational perspective from being derived from "truth", to being derived from self. Instead of being commanded by a network of truths what to do, how to feel, etc., I get to create that myself. I enjoy the world and the roles I choose to play in it immensely.I dont believe that you have reinvented the wheel.Or the way to bake bread. Or how to tame and milk a cow.Or how to paint like Michelangelo. And the et cetera is as long as human culture itself.