Difference between revisions of "Annotation:Text:The Construction of Knowledge/Imszzgolb4"
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|LastModificationDate=2019-07-24T15:19:50.725Z | |LastModificationDate=2019-07-24T15:19:50.725Z | ||
|LastModificationUser=User:Sarah Oberbichler | |LastModificationUser=User:Sarah Oberbichler | ||
| − | |AnnotationMetadata=^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Imszzgolb4","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ10Ӻ","startOffset":1269,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ10Ӻ","endOffset":3226°Ӻ,"quote":"This construction of proto-space immediately raises a second question: What are\nthe items in it doing while one is experiencing other things? After all, a lot was going\non in one’s experiential world during the interval the abandoned items spent in their\nrepository. The language in which I am describing this, the words “while” and\n“during”, already give away the trick. The “being” of the things in the repository gets\nextended so that they can keep up with the flow of my experience and be available\nwhen my attention turns to them again. This parallelism of two extensions – the flow\nof a subject’s experience and the individual identities stretched over intervals in their\nrepository is what I call “proto-time”. It is the beginning of the concept of time. It is\ndifferent from the notion of proto-space because in it there are already the notions of\n“before” and “after”. But this “before” and “after” is constructed by the projection of\nthe subject’s experiences on things in the repository that are not in the field of\nexperience. It is, indeed, this parallelism that makes it possible to choose a standard\nexperience, for instance the movement of a clock’s hand, and to project it on some\nother experiential sequence as a measure of time.\nTo me, therefore, time is not, as Prigogine said, an illusion. If I called the\nconstruct of time an illusion, the entire world that I know, the world that I live in,\nwould also have to be called an illusion. And that is not the way I would characterize\nit. Although my entire world is a construction, I can still make a useful distinction in it\nbetween illusion and reality. But remember that for me “reality” always refers to\nexperiential reality, not to the ontological reality of traditional philosophy. If we want\nto construct a rational reality for ourselves, time and space are indispensable building\nblocks, and I would rather call “illusion” any claim to knowledge beyond the field of | + | |AnnotationMetadata=^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Imszzgolb4","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ10Ӻ","startOffset":1269,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ10Ӻ","endOffset":3226°Ӻ,"quote":"This construction of proto-space immediately raises a second question: What are\nthe items in it doing while one is experiencing other things? After all, a lot was going\non in one’s experiential world during the interval the abandoned items spent in their\nrepository. The language in which I am describing this, the words “while” and\n“during”, already give away the trick. The “being” of the things in the repository gets\nextended so that they can keep up with the flow of my experience and be available\nwhen my attention turns to them again. This parallelism of two extensions – the flow\nof a subject’s experience and the individual identities stretched over intervals in their\nrepository is what I call “proto-time”. It is the beginning of the concept of time. It is\ndifferent from the notion of proto-space because in it there are already the notions of\n“before” and “after”. But this “before” and “after” is constructed by the projection of\nthe subject’s experiences on things in the repository that are not in the field of\nexperience. It is, indeed, this parallelism that makes it possible to choose a standard\nexperience, for instance the movement of a clock’s hand, and to project it on some\nother experiential sequence as a measure of time.\nTo me, therefore, time is not, as Prigogine said, an illusion. If I called the\nconstruct of time an illusion, the entire world that I know, the world that I live in,\nwould also have to be called an illusion. And that is not the way I would characterize\nit. Although my entire world is a construction, I can still make a useful distinction in it\nbetween illusion and reality. But remember that for me “reality” always refers to\nexperiential reality, not to the ontological reality of traditional philosophy. If we want\nto construct a rational reality for ourselves, time and space are indispensable building\nblocks, and I would rather call “illusion” any claim to knowledge beyond the field of our experience.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321045234147286177662":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","category":"Argumentation2","data_creacio":1562093952387° |
}} | }} | ||
{{Thema | {{Thema | ||
|field_text_autocomplete=Raum und Zeit | |field_text_autocomplete=Raum und Zeit | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 15:19, 18 March 2020
| Annotation of | Text:The_Construction_of_Knowledge |
|---|---|
| Annotation Comment | |
| Last Modification Date | 2019-07-24T15:19:50.725Z |
| Last Modification User | User:Sarah Oberbichler |
| Annotation Metadata | ^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Imszzgolb4","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ10Ӻ","startOffset":1269,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ10Ӻ","endOffset":3226°Ӻ,"quote":"This construction of proto-space immediately raises a second question: What are\nthe items in it doing while one is experiencing other things? After all, a lot was going\non in one’s experiential world during the interval the abandoned items spent in their\nrepository. The language in which I am describing this, the words “while” and\n“during”, already give away the trick. The “being” of the things in the repository gets\nextended so that they can keep up with the flow of my experience and be available\nwhen my attention turns to them again. This parallelism of two extensions – the flow\nof a subject’s experience and the individual identities stretched over intervals in their\nrepository is what I call “proto-time”. It is the beginning of the concept of time. It is\ndifferent from the notion of proto-space because in it there are already the notions of\n“before” and “after”. But this “before” and “after” is constructed by the projection of\nthe subject’s experiences on things in the repository that are not in the field of\nexperience. It is, indeed, this parallelism that makes it possible to choose a standard\nexperience, for instance the movement of a clock’s hand, and to project it on some\nother experiential sequence as a measure of time.\nTo me, therefore, time is not, as Prigogine said, an illusion. If I called the\nconstruct of time an illusion, the entire world that I know, the world that I live in,\nwould also have to be called an illusion. And that is not the way I would characterize\nit. Although my entire world is a construction, I can still make a useful distinction in it\nbetween illusion and reality. But remember that for me “reality” always refers to\nexperiential reality, not to the ontological reality of traditional philosophy. If we want\nto construct a rational reality for ourselves, time and space are indispensable building\nblocks, and I would rather call “illusion” any claim to knowledge beyond the field of our experience.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321045234147286177662":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","category":"Argumentation2","data_creacio":1562093952387°
|
| Thema | Raum und Zeit |
|---|
