THE problem of philosophy is that it is expected the single words have too simple of meanings. I have always been frustrated by the “objects” or whatever is taken as primary. They really never are primary. Perhaps physics will (or already has to some extent) reached what is primary. But the ordinary “objects” (including “mental objects”) are such complicated structures of these primitive “objects” that we will never be able to satisfactorily analyze them. We can, perhaps, get some general ideas about how parts of such an analysis would go. I think highly of Jerry Fodor and Danial Dennett. But such understanding will always be simplifications to which there will arise exceptions apparently leading to paradoxes. I am tired of struggling with this. I will continue reading, but realizing THE problem of philosophy makes me want to write philosophy no more. I want to spend my time studying computer languages (which are artificially simple). I enjoy programming like nothing else.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
THE problem of philosophy is that it is expected the single words have too simple of meanings. I have always been frustrated by the “objects” or whatever is taken as primary. They really never are primary. Perhaps physics will (or already has to some extent) reached what is primary. But… Continue reading