(no subject)
i decided instead to post an entirely different journal entry and attempt to get this all out as it comes to me.
after a short vacation, i have decided to come back to writing and posting in my journals. if this seems a little forced, i'm trying to work out the rust that's accumulated, so please bare with me. i want to spend this time explaining what i've been thinking about for the past day. its kind of funny because i think it all has something to do with chasing butterflies. i digress.
i've been reading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance for a bit and its helped me to understand a few things about reality and my relationship with it. i remember believing that the only proof of any thing's existence is our experience of it, empiricism. as i was reading, i came across what appears to be the refutation of empiricism. to some of you this may not be a surprise, but i'm new to this mind you.
pirsig displays this fact to me when he writes "if all our knowledge comes from sensory data, what exactly is this substance which is supposed to give off the sensory data itself?" upon reading this, a light bulb came on in my head. i remembered when studying transubstantiation, hearing the word substance used in the same way. it all came back to me and i began to understand the idea more of substance and accidents.
with that refuted, it was necessary to show me an alternative. pirsig quotes kant saying "That all our knowledge begins with experience there can be no doubt, [but]...it doesn't follow that [knowledge] arises out of experience."
i don't quite know the relevance of that just yet, or maybe i've forgotten it. but i'm done for now. i'll post more soon.
after a short vacation, i have decided to come back to writing and posting in my journals. if this seems a little forced, i'm trying to work out the rust that's accumulated, so please bare with me. i want to spend this time explaining what i've been thinking about for the past day. its kind of funny because i think it all has something to do with chasing butterflies. i digress.
i've been reading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance for a bit and its helped me to understand a few things about reality and my relationship with it. i remember believing that the only proof of any thing's existence is our experience of it, empiricism. as i was reading, i came across what appears to be the refutation of empiricism. to some of you this may not be a surprise, but i'm new to this mind you.
pirsig displays this fact to me when he writes "if all our knowledge comes from sensory data, what exactly is this substance which is supposed to give off the sensory data itself?" upon reading this, a light bulb came on in my head. i remembered when studying transubstantiation, hearing the word substance used in the same way. it all came back to me and i began to understand the idea more of substance and accidents.
with that refuted, it was necessary to show me an alternative. pirsig quotes kant saying "That all our knowledge begins with experience there can be no doubt, [but]...it doesn't follow that [knowledge] arises out of experience."
i don't quite know the relevance of that just yet, or maybe i've forgotten it. but i'm done for now. i'll post more soon.