[Socrates]

Many philosophers place an emphasis on the eyes, the cognitive function of sight, as the main way we think and get ideas, this tradition is most explicit in Plato and Descartes.

Other philosophers, notably Heidegger, talk of hands as the main point of recognition, as we ‘grasp’ ideas and craft, that is to say ‘think’ with our hands. Hands can also reach for the other.

Any thoughts on this? I suppose my question is, are there any other parts of the body that ‘think’?

[atreestump]

Corey on Wittgenstein- it’s not only the mind that thinks.

[Socrates]

Bumped thread due to relevance to current discussions. @”Intellectus”

[Intellectus]

Many philosophers place an emphasis on the eyes, the cognitive function of sight, as the main way we think and get ideas, this tradition is most explicit in Plato and Descartes.

Other philosophers, notably Heidegger, talk of hands as the main point of recognition, as we ‘grasp’ ideas and craft, that is to say ‘think’ with our hands. Hands can also reach for the other.

Any thoughts on this? I suppose my question is, are there any other parts of the body that ‘think’?

Yes, try thinking that body is thinking as a whole. A single unit…just like your able to type on the computer, while sitting down, while reading this, why probably tapping your foot…it goes on and on. I understand that people need to “focus” on one thing to really understand it…but the best way to understand something is to get the whole picture of it first and then break it down. This is the same for any idea….like what is the purpose of this conversation? Answer: to explore if there are any other parts of the body that ‘think’…that’s the purpose and everything that you can think of is the “right” answer. I personally believe in the “gut” brain being the primary brain and our brain the secondary. The “gut” feeling is primal…its source is embedded in us…this is why babies are born in the womb…its a symbol of life…a creation. the Mind can create but only the womb can house physical creation. This is why I think some women inherently  feel that they are “higher” in authority  just because they can create life….So the gut brain creates physical and the brain creates metaphorical. This is a interesting notion that Heidegger had, and I think he was on to something…he just stopped thinking and made a decision too early….you need to keep going down the rabbit hole and reach the end. But that is impossible right? its impossible to believe that you can come to any conclusion based on anything that is in this physical gut brain or the actual brain because eventually you need to make a decision.

This is why I understand that people are wrong but are also right in their own way. I really see the end, like the end of the rabbit hole or the primordial spiral..its never ending but its like I can go further if I just thought one second ahead of every decision ever made. This makes me sound so arrogant…but its genuine belief.

[atreestump]

Yes, try thinking that body is thinking as a whole. A single unit…

I see the body as entirely social, the body is made up of ‘dividuals’.
 

I personally believe in the “gut” brain being the primary brain and our brain the secondary.

Totally agree. It is a mistake to only think of mind/brain as being entirely in the head, we are awash with sensations and reactions throughout our entire body, reflexes and reactions.
 

This is why I think some women inherently  feel that they are “higher” in authority  just because they can create life….

Can you give me an example of who you are referring to? I don’t know if this is the case.
 

This is a interesting notion that Heidegger had, and I think he was on to something…he just stopped thinking and made a decision too early….you need to keep going down the rabbit hole and reach the end.

Well, this is just one particular aspect of Heidegger, he most certainly expanded on this and so did Derrida a few years later. What decision?

[Intellectus]

Yes, try thinking that body is thinking as a whole. A single unit…

I see the body as entirely social, the body is made up of ‘dividuals’.
 

I personally believe in the “gut” brain being the primary brain and our brain the secondary.

Totally agree. It is a mistake to only think of mind/brain as being entirely in the head, we are awash with sensations and reactions throughout our entire body, reflexes and reactions.
 

This is why I think some women inherently  feel that they are “higher” in authority  just because they can create life….

Can you give me an example of who you are referring to? I don’t know if this is the case.
 

This is a interesting notion that Heidegger had, and I think he was on to something…he just stopped thinking and made a decision too early….you need to keep going down the rabbit hole and reach the end.

Well, this is just one particular aspect of Heidegger, he most certainly expanded on this and so did Derrida a few years later. What decision?

Women question: I am speaking in general terms of course. But as women obtained the right to vote, they became aware of “power” of men. I’m not saying I hate women, just a simple observation of the past. Women have always played an important role in being the protector of the house and care giver. Its primal, or close to the source. However, the mind has taken over as the “dominant” brain as I already explain that I think the gut brain is primary. I believe women played the most important role in that she was the “reflection” of the man meaning….the better half…the person he went to for help for anything he had a problem with. This is more power than man will ever have yet, this notion is lost in the pages of time. Women started using their “rights” or their brains to make the decisions leaving Men grasping for a role. 

A mans role is simple, go out and hunt and gather the resources to the home, and protect the ones he loves. He is primal, logical…closer to the source than the women i believe, however, understands that the women can create physical life, therefore needs to do anything to protect her. However, over time, the mans role has been thrown to mean nothing..as women are seen to graduate in higher numbers, make the same if not more as a single women in the same field, and believe that they are oppressed. All of which is just a role of the man and women that is shifting due to people’s feelings, and not logic. 

So what can anyone do about this since its now considered the “norm.” Well, self-awareness will bring one closer to the source, therefore make a decision based on primal roles. Which worked because nature intended them to work that way. Thinking in the brain rather than the gut brain destroys the balance because everything has a purpose in nature. We evolved into the one thing that the planet didn’t account for….or it did and its just waiting for something, or someone to shift it back into balance.

[Socrates]

Gender would be something that Heidegger would say is ready-at-hand.

[atreestump]

I have moved the off topic posts here: https://ontic-philosophy.com/Thread-Identity-Politics

[Intellectus]

I only share links or suggest that someone read an article when it has relevance to what is being discussed and it’s not meant to come across as ‘do your own research’, which I consider insulting (not always). Philosophy’s main tool is language – we are trying to come up with the best possible explanation with the fewest assumptions possible.

Politics inevitably will have biases, this is because we usually start with what we have in a material sense, for example, it makes no sense for me to advocate policies that only benefit the rich and damage the poor, as it is not in my material interest, but material things don’t count for much within politics and economics, what count are desires.

We are all projects, projecting towards the future with projectiles flying at us and justice is the thing we are all answering a call from, that is what drives us all, that is what philosophy started out as, it asks what justice is, what the good is and what is the best way to live a good life.

I don’t advocate a kind of relativism, which is another way of saying ‘every view is as good as every other view’ as this simply isn’t true and never has been, but we all have varying perspectives, different truths about the same reality but they all contradict each other.

The ego is entirely a construct, we are made from the outside and it’s nothing more than a film between reality as it is and our experience of it, it is only language that separates us from the rest of the world around us and so there is no inside/outside in many respects, but this separateness and differance (not misspelled by the way!) or the differentiation and deferral of meaning is the necessity of being. Differance is justice.

Thank you for your truth. I can feel it. Now I can reply back with no hesitation….

If you label something you are doing two things. You are bring it into life and you are destroying it at the same time. Bringing it to life means giving it a meaning. Destroying it or killing it by putting a limit on it. Something created  doesn’t know what it is but it knows it has a purpose. I believe that anything created by man is not perfect because we are imperfect beings. We try to create a “perfect” system but something like this Perfectly balanced Earth can never be recreated by Man. Because it was the power of evolution that created Earth to create everything within it, including Man, and this is why no one can answer “What Am I, or Who Am I?” The Earth may not be “alive” to many but it is, because we are alive. Earth came before Man. This is fact. And nothing created by Earth has any reason to fear…but the “other” is needed for the balance that the system is built upon. I really respect you and your views, but they are just not complete. If you can imagine the primordial spiral as you close your eyes…just think that everyone is on the top thinking they are at the bottom of it…which is the “point” ,the end. But its never ending…so no matter what you think or how much information you gather to find your answer…your ego will always be there, doing what it does. To be a individual. Unless you “let go” …which means to empty your cup or empty your mind completely, which is utterly impossible unless you just go on faith alone. This is how religion was built upon…to play to peoples ego. But we can clearly see that who ever created it wasn’t the actual “god figure”, as the book was written by Man, just an interpretation. Because religion has killed so many but I say, it needed to happen in order to get to where we are. People say that “mother nature” creates things to keep it alive and it has created so much natural disasters to keep the population down. Things such as Man to create religion, or the plague, or Ebola. We just havent died out yet because it was waiting for something. “it” to be awakened. 

However, your truths has kept my interest because without you, I would not learn. Others need to be seek others in order to grow. But I still think you are wrong but I accept you as you are as I hope you accept me as I am. This makes us both continue down our personal primordial spirals and thats what I truly want for all. To just accept that they wont find thier way but know that someone has actually found a way to keep searching for it. Like a well known motivation speaker or spiritual coach. But I shift to philosphy and science to try my luck on the Minds that need to see someone in person and not some deity created by Man. But Man created Man to bring everyone together. like the missing Link. Or Link from Zelda, a Hero. The Hero of a thousand faces. 🙂

[Socrates]

If you label something you are doing two things. You are bring it into life and you are destroying it at the same time. Bringing it to life means giving it a meaning. Destroying it or killing it by putting a limit on it.

This reminds me of Soren Keirkegaard when he says:
 

When you name me you negate me,
You exclude all of the other possibilities of what I could be,
But when you name me,
You define that I exist

Other philosophers like Spinoza and Hegel, speak of negativity. Spinoza says that ‘all determination is negation’ and Hegel goes further to say that ‘all negation is determination’. This is to say that when we say what something is not, we define what it is. In regards to Being, it is a question as to whether we are actually ‘being’ or ‘yet-to-be’, in a constant state of becoming and so we enter affirmation, rather than negation.
 

Something created  doesn’t know what it is but it knows it has a purpose.

I think it presumes it has a purpose. I don’t think there are fixed purposes, only relational functions that require a convention.
 

I believe that anything created by man is not perfect because we are imperfect beings.

By what are we measuring ourselves against?
 

We try to create a “perfect” system but something like this Perfectly balanced Earth can never be recreated by Man.

I don’t think we live in a balance, I think we live in relative stability, but pretty much everything that functions in the world is fundamentally parasitic, it'[s just that over time symbiotic (mutual beneficial) relationships emerge, which are just less parasitic and offer some form of exchange.

For sure, man can’t create the Earth or the Universe, so that is beyond our limits in the first place and so the search for perfection is futile to begin with.
 

The Earth may not be “alive” to many but it is, because we are alive.

I think one could make the argument that the earth and by extension, the Universe, can be seen as one organism with dividual components, one and the many, and by this logic, we could say all is alive and full of life.
 

Unless you “let go” …which means to empty your cup or empty your mind completely, which is utterly impossible unless you just go on faith alone.

While it paradoxical to think about nothing, as you will immediately think about an empty space or ‘nothing’, I don’t think the doctrine of emptiness is looking to achieve a mindless state, but rather a mindful state. We always talk in terms of substance and ‘things’, ‘stuff’; but the artist cannot create on a full canvas, we cannot walk through bodies in a busy street and as all is relational and dependently originated, there is always a space in between that we seek, a way through and to be open to all possibilities until a relationship becomes.
 

Because religion has killed so many but I say, it needed to happen in order to get to where we are. People say that “mother nature” creates things to keep it alive and it has created so much natural disasters to keep the population down. Things such as Man to create religion, or the plague, or Ebola. We just havent died out yet because it was waiting for something. “it” to be awakened

We are everything that has ever been up to this moment, but this view of time is entirely of our own creation, there has only ever been one, eternal instant. What is the awakening about?

[atreestump]

I still think you are wrong but I accept you as you are as I hope you accept me as I am.

I am sure we can’t agree on everything, but I would be very grateful if you could show me how you think I am wrong at some point.

[Author]

Posts