Political Crossfire Forums

The Newb · Joined: 06 Oct 2006 Posts: 2665

tangible objects are things that hold substance and mass from the smallest proton to the largest star

intangible things would be things that have no substance and mass

heres the question:

a belief is an intangible object by common definition, however if you break down what a belief really is you will see that it holds substance and mass

in the human brain there are chemical reactions that actually create thought processes, and memories, knowledge, beliefs. these are stored in nerves within the brain for recall at will thus leaving the fact that the intangible are actually tangible

your thoughts

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7657

"I think, therefore I am." - Descartes

bob.appleyard · Joined: 15 Oct 2005 Posts: 7469 Location: Manchestar, innit

Intangible things exist, but they exist in another realm.

Platonic Idealism holds that observable reality is an imperfect reflection of perfect forms. So, while there is no such thing as a circle in real life, circles do nevertheless exist. Thus, most mathematicians and theoretical phycisists are platonic idealists.

Fido · Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 3936

The Newb wrote: tangible objects are things that hold substance and mass from the smallest proton to the largest star

intangible things would be things that have no substance and mass

heres the question:

a belief is an intangible object by common definition, however if you break down what a belief really is you will see that it holds substance and mass

in the human brain there are chemical reactions that actually create thought processes, and memories, knowledge, beliefs. these are stored in nerves within the brain for recall at will thus leaving the fact that the intangible are actually tangible

your thoughts

The chemical copies our mind holds of experience are not real, but only what they are, having their own reality, which cannot exist outside of the mind except as chemicals. Ideas, beliefs, concepts, and forms are not real. If it were true that the world is my idea, then the idea is the world. Rather, the world exists apart from idea, and the idea represents the real. Now, what is the practical effect of this fact? I think it is that the general unreality of ideas predispose the mind to make new realities out of old. We are weaklings, but we can lift a lot of mental weight with out fatigue. For this reason much of what we know of as human, and coming from humans was not accidental, but intended consciously to be immense. The Pyramids may stand like a pile of sand, but if they did not happen intangably, and imaginatively, then they would not have happened at all. Everything mental has a quality of space, but not of weight. When humans began to think it done they could get it done. The beginning and the end of ideas are the only real parts.

thefranzkafkafront · Posted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:36 pm Post subject:

Depends what you mean by exist.

Something certainly dosent have to be physical to 'exist'.

Fido · Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 3936

bob.appleyard wrote: Intangible things exist, but they exist in another realm.

Platonic Idealism holds that observable reality is an imperfect reflection of perfect forms. So, while there is no such thing as a circle in real life, circles do nevertheless exist. Thus, most mathematicians and theoretical phycisists are platonic idealists.

You don't really buy this Platonic forms stuff your self, do you? It is easy in the case of mathematics to imagine a perfect form. It is easy to say 1 is 1, or A is A when working with ones and A's. To look at other forms, this is not so easy. We cannot imagine a perfect justice exists from any examples we have on this earth, but all forms are perfect. Yet, we cannot work with a mixed concept. Our minds distill all this from that so we can see what that is even if there really is no pure 'that' found on this earth. Plato was confusing cause with effect, and confusing the ability to understand through concepts to understanding from concepts. IMO.

mODULAR mAN · Joined: 13 Oct 2006 Posts: 852 Location: censored

Ever heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates?

Morons!

(Actually, I agree. Plato was WAY OFF. But he did a good job for his time.)

The intangible does not exist, since they are self-defining - and, as Buddhists claim, the self does not exist...

And, I don't exist... I (woooo) all innnn (wwoooooo) yourrr mind (wowooooo)......

The Newb · Joined: 06 Oct 2006 Posts: 2665

thanks for the replies i am new to philisophical thinking please keep them coming i enjoy reading the different veiws

bob.appleyard · Joined: 15 Oct 2005 Posts: 7469 Location: Manchestar, innit

Fido wrote: bob.appleyard wrote: Intangible things exist, but they exist in another realm.

Platonic Idealism holds that observable reality is an imperfect reflection of perfect forms. So, while there is no such thing as a circle in real life, circles do nevertheless exist. Thus, most mathematicians and theoretical phycisists are platonic idealists.

You don't really buy this Platonic forms stuff your self, do you? It is easy in the case of mathematics to imagine a perfect form. It is easy to say 1 is 1, or A is A when working with ones and A's. To look at other forms, this is not so easy. We cannot imagine a perfect justice exists from any examples we have on this earth, but all forms are perfect. Yet, we cannot work with a mixed concept. Our minds distill all this from that so we can see what that is even if there really is no pure 'that' found on this earth. Plato was confusing cause with effect, and confusing the ability to understand through concepts to understanding from concepts. IMO.

This is unconnected to Platonic idealism.

MplsBison · Joined: 13 Dec 2005 Posts: 3237

I think the concept of intangible things exsists and is accepted by everyone.

A more interesting question to me is "can you own an intangible thing?".

My vote is no.

Fido · Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 3936

bob.appleyard wrote: Fido wrote: bob.appleyard wrote: Intangible things exist, but they exist in another realm.

Platonic Idealism holds that observable reality is an imperfect reflection of perfect forms. So, while there is no such thing as a circle in real life, circles do nevertheless exist. Thus, most mathematicians and theoretical phycisists are platonic idealists.

You don't really buy this Platonic forms stuff your self, do you? It is easy in the case of mathematics to imagine a perfect form. It is easy to say 1 is 1, or A is A when working with ones and A's. To look at other forms, this is not so easy. We cannot imagine a perfect justice exists from any examples we have on this earth, but all forms are perfect. Yet, we cannot work with a mixed concept. Our minds distill all this from that so we can see what that is even if there really is no pure 'that' found on this earth. Plato was confusing cause with effect, and confusing the ability to understand through concepts to understanding from concepts. IMO.

This is unconnected to Platonic idealism.

Bob, since your definition of Platonic forms is as I understand it to be is correct, and since I do not agree with what Plato saw in ideas, and rather believe all ideas are perfect, and yet unreal; please tell me in what fashion you think it is unconnected.

There is a point here, that I should make. Whether math or physics, the tangible as conceived can be measure, so it is the stuff of science. Math is a model for reality, but is based on simple identity or the theory of conservation, which is for tangible qualities, tangible. With the increase of technology, more precise and sensitive measuring tools has taken much of what once was philosophy into the world of science. Now Philosophy deals almost exclusively with intangibles, metaphysical in the sense of being apart from the physical world of sensation, that can be measured, but not metaphysical in the sense of forces beyond the control of men, like spirits, and gods, and magic. If we deal with a concept like justice, we may think of justice as a real quality and not just a concept that is still beyond sensation or measurement. To know anything of justice we have to measure its effect in presence, and its effect in want, and of course, by way of illustration, to examine authorities, and history. The other side of all these intangible concepts is that we relate through them. No concept is entirely abstract, because no concept is formed that is not shared, and in sharing these we relate. Justice is not only a concept but a form of relationship. Government is not only a concept but a form of relationship. Love is not only a concept, but a form of a relationship, but marriage is a more formal form of relationship yet. What do you think.

The Newb · Joined: 06 Oct 2006 Posts: 2665

so what you guys are saying is that science and philosophy dont mix?

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: Col 2:8 - See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

Fido · Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 3936

The Newb wrote: so what you guys are saying is that science and philosophy dont mix?

I don't know about not mixing. They were for centuries essentially the same thing. Experts in any field of science can receive a PHD. Philosophy developed scientific method, and still should govern science ethically. But science as we know it is hard science, and philosophy has a softer and more universal outlook. In the sense that science as we know it deals the tangible, it also deals with the measurable, and so can apply the logic of mathematics. Try to do that with an emotion. Though, even there science is making quantitative observations, able to observe emotions as they spread though the brain, and soon it will measure. Will this tell us much? Only if you accept that the total of man is equal to the sum of his parts. And only if you guess that the measure of one man is the measure of all men.

The Newb · Joined: 06 Oct 2006 Posts: 2665

Fido wrote: The Newb wrote: so what you guys are saying is that science and philosophy dont mix?

I don't know about not mixing. They were for centuries essentially the same thing. Experts in any field of science can receive a PHD. Philosophy developed scientific method, and still should govern science ethically. But science as we know it is hard science, and philosophy has a softer and more universal outlook. In the sense that science as we know it deals the tangible, it also deals with the measurable, and so can apply the logic of mathematics. Try to do that with an emotion. Though, even there science is making quantitative observations, able to observe emotions as they spread though the brain, and soon it will measure. Will this tell us much? Only if you accept that the total of man is equal to the sum of his parts. And only if you guess that the measure of one man is the measure of all men.

you pretty much hit my point i am way more science minded than philosophical and am trying to learn to think more philosophically, i put up a question that i could relate to, and well found out i was wrong on a few levels....cool though that is how i learn

it is hard for me to believe that there is no intangible, i am a christian, however, when you come down to it thoughts, beliefs, transfered thoughts (i.e. these forum discussions ), anything that starts with the brain stays in the brain as a tangible object. the only thing i can see as intangible would be god....some here do not believe in god so that would conclude that with them there is no intangible at all

would that seem a fair asessment?

Fido · Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 3936

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: Col 2:8 - See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

Obligations are ours, and consequences are God's. Thomas J. 'Stonewall' Jackson.

If Jesus were not considered God, he would be the West's greatest philosopher. He was always rational, defeated Roman paganism, and Jewish legalism, and he would still be effective were it not for the bad examples set by his followers, and, for the fact that all universally reject the existence of God, and so dismiss Jesus. Paul made the victory of Jesus over the Romans certain, but made certain the organization would triumph over the man Jesus was. If Jesus was God he gave nothing by death since he was immortal. Jesus suffered unto death, and that suffering was prophetic, but unremarkable unless he was human, and had only one life to lay down. It is a true generosity to give what you have no second one of.

Which brings me back to the subject. We tend to look on life as intangible. That is why a question as to the meaning of life draws so many responses. What many people fail to consider is that even while the nature of life is obscure, and while the lives of others seem intangible; to each and every one, their life is the one tangible reality, and it is through that reality that all things are viewed.

The Newb · Joined: 06 Oct 2006 Posts: 2665

Quote: to each and every one, their life is the one tangible reality, and it is through that reality that all things are viewed.

definately something to think about :think:

zentrait · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 532

Can thoughts, ideas, and concepts have mass and form? ...if anything, they possess energy, chemical reactions and the firing of synapses...physical, like The Newb described. Now if we take this down to the minutest scale, and introduce in string theory where the particles are so infinitely small that they fluctuate between time and space...ideas, thoughts and concepts could hold a true form in any number of alternate universes, bonded by dark matter produced from the energy of our brain. From here the possibilities of tangible forms of thought are endless, even to the point where an alternate universe is the perfect reflection of imperfect forms...and vice versa...sideways, and upside down... I could be thinking that I'm bathing myself in beautiful women...and in some other alternate universe...it could be happening...

...hmmmmm....need to go ponder for a while, be back in two minutes...or so...

thefranzkafkafront · Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:55 pm Post subject:

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: Col 2:8 - See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

Go back to your forum theology boy.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

thefranzkafkafront wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: Col 2:8 - See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

Go back to your forum theology boy.

:lol: I'd rather stay and poke holes in sophistry masquerading as intelligent thought. And you don't have what it takes to make me go away.