Normal
QUOTE=CaramelChocolate]No no I am assuming it as it is the most logical and common assumption when we think about God.Perhaps I should clarify: I don't see why you need to bring god into this at all. You seem to be begging the question (ie you are assuming that which you are trying to demonstrate) because you want to believe what you are terming anti-realism requires a god that constantly perceives all things so that objects can continue existing when you are not perceiving them. So you are getting to anti-realism because of your realist assumption that objects continue existing --sort of a philosophical slight of hand that Berkeley is also guilty of. Caramel chocolate said :I still feel that Indian thought fits in more with Anti-Realism rather than the Abrahamic faiths... I have to disagree with you on this one. I think that Indian thought allows far more interesting metaphysical objects but at its core it is staunchly representational. You could be right about this though I haven't given it much thought. As you probably know brahma (or pratkri,chit, consciousness, etc.) is usually termed the ultimate reality and most if not all Indian thought relies heavily on this concept. Even in your view at least God must be ultimately real (hence I don't think that you are really an anti-realist) Caramel chocolate said: Haha... I HAVE to do it... am studying philosophy and it is very confusing :8- It doesen't get any better I am currently in the midst of graduate level work in philosophy so take it from me a lot of confusion and angst lies ahead!
QUOTE=CaramelChocolate]No no I am assuming it as it is the most logical and common assumption when we think about God.
Perhaps I should clarify: I don't see why you need to bring god into this at all. You seem to be begging the question (ie you are assuming that which you are trying to demonstrate) because you want to believe what you are terming anti-realism requires a god that constantly perceives all things so that objects can continue existing when you are not perceiving them. So you are getting to anti-realism because of your realist assumption that objects continue existing --sort of a philosophical slight of hand that Berkeley is also guilty of.
Caramel chocolate said :I still feel that Indian thought fits in more with Anti-Realism rather than the Abrahamic faiths...
I have to disagree with you on this one. I think that Indian thought allows far more interesting metaphysical objects but at its core it is staunchly representational. You could be right about this though I haven't given it much thought. As you probably know brahma (or pratkri,chit, consciousness, etc.) is usually termed the ultimate reality and most if not all Indian thought relies heavily on this concept. Even in your view at least God must be ultimately real (hence I don't think that you are really an anti-realist)
Caramel chocolate said: Haha... I HAVE to do it... am studying philosophy and it is very confusing :8-
It doesen't get any better I am currently in the midst of graduate level work in philosophy so take it from me a lot of confusion and angst lies ahead!
