2009-04-03

Pema Pera: Welcome to the phenomenology workshop: see http://www.kira.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=93&Itemid=123
Pema Pera: Today we continue our discussion about some of the theory behind phenomenology
Pema Pera: We started to read a paper that I wrote 13 years ago: http://www.ids.ias.edu/~piet/publ/other/husserlcircle.html
Pema Pera: oops, no, that one was more like 8 years ago, sorry :-).
Pema Pera: does anyone have any questions, comments, suggestions?
Be Ewing: Yes
Pema Pera: (for those new here: we have spent many sessions of my experimental explorations, and now we decided to return a bit more to theory)
Pema Pera: yes, Be?
Alfred Kelberry: i'd still like to know about this "anti-philosophy era"
Be Ewing: Could you please give basic definition of "phenomenology" for those of us who have not read your paper/s?
Be Ewing: Is this the ability to produce things in your life from your thoughts?
Be Ewing: Or other?
Pema Pera: Not so easy to give a complete definition, but roughly speaking the idea is that you start by inspecting all that appears, all phenomena in your consciousness, be they thoughts, feelings, perceptions, whatever -- and then to try to see patterns in them
Be Ewing: integration of your perceptions
Pema Pera: but it is also the name for a school in philosophy, started by Husserl -- a google search will give you more background
Pema Pera: Alfred, which sentence did you quote ?
Pema Pera: in your question?
Alfred Kelberry: em..
Mickorod Renard: was it after the war?
Alfred Kelberry: "future historians have a rich palette of possible reasons to choose from, when trying to understand why the anti-philosophy era began to wane"
Pema Pera: ah yes, I meant to say that after the second world war many scientists turned away from philosophy, especially continental (German) philosophy, because they associated it with Nazism
Be Ewing: well ... I am neither an historian nor a philosopher
Alfred Kelberry: hmm..
Be Ewing: but notice said anyone could show up and participate ... so I do bring life experience tot the table :)
Tarmel Udimo: yes BeEwing?
Be Ewing: Tarmel ?
Pema Pera: but shall we start talking specifically about the paper?
Pema Pera: for those who actually read the paper
Mickorod Renard: yes pls
Pema Pera: does anyone like to comment?
Tarmel Udimo: ahhh i thought you were going to tell us about an experience, sorry > BeWing
Be Ewing: Tarmel - right now Pema's looking for people who have read his paper to comment
Pema Pera: Two weeks ago, I got the impression that many of you were eager to get a bit more systematic about phenomenology
Pema Pera: that's why I offered the paper, as a framework . . . .
Pema Pera: but if you prefer a different approach, please do let me know
Teleo Aeon: sorry. do you have a link ?
Mickorod Renard: I think that science became entrenched in its direction
Pema Pera: I haven't heard much feedback yet
Pema Pera: http://www.ids.ias.edu/~piet/publ/other/husserlcircle.html
Teleo Aeon: ty
Tarmel Udimo: well I am not sure if this relates but I have been thinking alot about
Eliza Madrigal: I've read the paper several times, Pema, but I'm still sort of background-processing and reading, so have nothing to ask at this time :)
Pema Pera: question about background are fine too, for sure!
Tarmel Udimo: the universe giving birth to itself
Pema Pera: or just about clarifications
Be Ewing: What is the net net bottomline of the paper from those of you who have read it?
Mickorod Renard: I was wodering whether you think that science may well have took diferent routes..from a more philosophical context?
Tarmel Udimo: this big bang theory
Mickorod Renard: more theory,,less proof?
Tarmel Udimo: emergent properties
Be Ewing: All things are related?
Tarmel Udimo: sorry counter talking here
Pema Pera: well, Mick, I don't like to speculate about "what if", but prefer to talk about phenomenology now
Mickorod Renard: ok
Pema Pera: what about big bang theory, Tarmel?
Tarmel Udimo: well its like in order to understand we need to assume that there was an intelligence
Pema Pera: no need to assume anything, Tarmel
Tarmel Udimo: that created it so in giving birth to the universe there was a plan or principles
Pema Pera: phenomenology studies phenomena as phenomena, no reason to look for anything behind those.
Be Ewing: What if it was a complete roll of the dice?
Teleo Aeon: I would expect the use of phenomenology is to do the opposite.. to bracket out the assumption
Pema Pera: That is the key idea of Husserl's epoche.
Pema Pera: See Exploration 12: Husserl's Epoche
Be Ewing: Like total game theory
Pema Pera: whilch was part of our homework for last week and this week
Pema Pera: yes, Teleo, indeed!
Pema Pera: shall we return to the paper?
Pema Pera: or was the paper too difficult?
Be Ewing: I'll shush Pema ... my apologies
Pema Pera: or too strange?
Pema Pera: (sentences out of order)
Scathach Rhiadra: can you talk some more about radical phenomenology?
Mickorod Renard: we talked of fractals earlier,,in nature fractals feature heavily,,from a phenemology point,,why shouldnt fractals be the underpin of the universe?
Pema Pera: To start with Scathach, phenomenology can be done in two ways:
Pema Pera: 1) we can start with a firm belief/assumption of a material world in space and time, and then do phenomenology within that view, which I called elegant phenomenology
Pema Pera: 2) we can completely set aside the question of what the universe really is, that is what I called radical phenomenology
Enzooo Sellers: hi
Be Ewing: I like 2
Be Ewing: Hi Enzooo :)
Pema Pera: so 2) is very radical, but does not mean denying or even doubting the material world -- it is more radical than Descartes
Pema Pera: it really means: I now see the world ONLY as phenomena
Pema Pera: it takes a few months or so to really do that
Pema Pera: and Exploration 12: Husserl's Epoche gives you some hints
Teleo Aeon: yes 2. erase time and collapse space.
Pema Pera: for those of you attempting to do that, I'd love to hear what you find
Scathach Rhiadra nods
Pema Pera: yes, Teleo
Tarmel Udimo: well that was what i was getting at
Pema Pera: so instead of assuming that our consciousness appears within a material world in space and time
Pema Pera: we can study how our *experiences of* the material world appear in consciousness
Pema Pera: without having to buy into either existence or non-existene of that world
Be Ewing: that our consciousness somehow produces the world we experience?
Tarmel Udimo: yes giving birth to itself
Mickorod Renard: nice
Pema Pera: Be, the only thing we can say is: our consciousness produces the experiences of that world -- we don't have access to that world except through our experiences -- that is the *key* point
Be Ewing: thanks Pema
Scathach Rhiadra: would you say it is moving away from perceiver and perceived and just experiencing 'perceiving', so to speak?
Pema Pera: you can have an experience of seeing/touching a chair, but you cannot put the chair inside your consciousness :-)
Pema Pera: Scathach, that is the next step, not written about in the paper:)
Scathach Rhiadra: ah:)
Pema Pera: within phenomenology there are the phenomena of objects, for a subject
Pema Pera: and when you ask how subject and object and interactions between those appear, you go to what I call appearances, a kind of second epoche!
Pema Pera: so: matter -> experience -> appearance
Pema Pera: or: matter -> phenomena -> appearances
Pema Pera: each arrow a kind of bracketing, an epoche
Tarmel Udimo: or the ooposite
Be Ewing: okay ... so I see pereception of consciousness here in SL virtual reality ... this chair I am sitting on ... is in concsciousness of some huge database somewhere that someone materialized into an object here that I am sitting on -- as real as the chair in my RL room that I am sitting on ... where does all this virtual reality pheonomena fit in?
Pema Pera: how so, Tarmel?
Tarmel Udimo: we were saying the same thing overlap
Pema Pera: does anyone who hasn't spoken yet want to add something?
Eliza Madrigal: How does this fit with the idea of "No subject/No object...No separation in between" or does it?
Pema Pera: that's the second epoche, beyond this current paper :)
Pema Pera is wondering whether he should write the next paper :-)
Eliza Madrigal: Okay :) Yes.
Scathach Rhiadra: :)
Myna Maven: :)
Pema Pera: And Be, yes, phenomenology applies to SL and RL, in the same way
Tarmel Udimo: which would be: appearance > phenomena>matter
Pema Pera: ah, sure
Pema Pera: you can move in both directions
Tarmel Udimo: nods
Pema Pera: (here I use "sheer appearance" not just mere appearance as in what appears vs. what it really is)
Be Ewing: Pema - please clarify "both directions"
Pema Pera: (what appears as it appears, without trying to interpret it as something else)
Pema Pera: Tarmel, do you want to clarify your arrows?
Tarmel Udimo: well thinking if the source is Appearnace as pema means appearance, it would change our relationship to phenomena and then matter
Tarmel Udimo: appearnace
Tarmel Udimo: spelling....
Pema Pera: yes
Tarmel Udimo: this what creates
Pema Pera: the question is what is contained within what, roughly speaking . . .
Be Ewing: What if all is/are contatined within all?
Be Ewing: contained *
Tarmel Udimo: and if one refrains from assuming that there are inherent laws in this creating what is this appearance
Pema Pera: we bypass any question of creating . . ..
Tarmel Udimo: yes then what?
Pema Pera: . .. by studying, first, phenoneman, and perhaps then go on to appearance
Be Ewing: hmmm
Pema Pera: asking why is a different question, or where from
Pema Pera: phenomenology studies phenomena qua phenomena, as phenomena
Tarmel Udimo: yes that was not the question
Pema Pera: yes, Tarmel?
Mickorod Renard: even our thoughts creating an interpretation of the chair?
Pema Pera: what was the question?
Tarmel Udimo: if appearance presents itslef as phenomena
Tarmel Udimo: itself
Teleo Aeon: we are biasing out four other sense though when we talk of appearances ?
Fefonz Quan: I think appearance talks about all sense teleo
Be Ewing: By appearance do you mean only visual perception? ... Or all sensory perceptions?
Fefonz Quan: senses*
Pema Pera: I mean appearances in the most general way, Teleo, anything that appears, a thought, a perception, a memory, feeling, whatever
Fefonz Quan: all (to be)
Teleo Aeon: ok
Be Ewing: Fefonz - thanks
Mickorod Renard: but we must look at it without creating an impression?
Pema Pera: what do you mean, Mick?
Mickorod Renard: sorry,,I was tryin to understand an earlier bit
Be Ewing: as a third-person observer Mickorod?
Mickorod Renard: i will copy it
Be Ewing: Pema - are you still only including people who have read your paper in this discussion? :)
Pema Pera: I'd like to hear from people who've read the paper, but there seem to be few questions/comments about it :)
Mickorod Renard: cant find it,,but its linked to this ;-(what appears as it appears, without trying to interpret it as something else)
Pema Pera: which is fine, but it raises the question: what would you prefer to do for next week?
Pema Pera: back to experiments, or more background overviews?
Be Ewing: Well ... I do have one picture in my mind
Be Ewing: and I'm not sure how this relates to this group or philosophy
Tarmel Udimo: the question I am trying to answer Mick
Mickorod Renard: Well i read it pema,,but maybe not in the right vein
Be Ewing: but it comes from various discussions etc in recent week in SL
Be Ewing: and some artwork/science from the past
Be Ewing: in my mind I have this sphere
Pema Pera: Scathach, Eliza, Tarmel, Alfred, Fefonz, Myna, what would you like to do for next week?
Be Ewing: the sphere is composed of all "uhappy" serial numbers
Myna Maven: I've also read it several times over the past couple of weeks...
Be Ewing: and in the middle are "happy" point numbers
Scathach Rhiadra: well, I have read you paper, but could do with reading it again:)
Fefonz Quan came late this week, so stll need to catch up on this meeting log...
Tarmel Udimo: yes me too
Eliza Madrigal: When I was reading about "elegant materialism" I actually felt that it was close to the place where most are these days because of layman's books on quantum mechanics, etc...
Be Ewing: and all phenomena exist among those
Fefonz Quan: sounds good to me
Myna Maven: But I feel like I am missing something there...
Myna Maven: Or not there...
Mickorod Renard: tarmel,,you wrote this:-Tarmel Udimo: and if one refrains from assuming that there are inherent laws in this creating what is this appearance
Teleo Aeon: is it possible that there may well be a way in which, what appears is actually already in some way the appearance as an artifact of a previous embeded and already embodied interpretation. ?
Scathach Rhiadra: also would like to maybe get back to some experiments, maybe the epoche?
Alfred Kelberry: i'd like to talk more on this radical pheno way
Pema Pera: yes, Eliza, indeed, elegant materialism is the most popular, these days
Tarmel Udimo: does that answer your question pema:-)
Eliza Madrigal: ...so I was surprised that you didn't spend more time there...and felt that my thinking was quite shallow...so, I'm digging.
Tarmel Udimo: several to choose from there...:-)
Eliza Madrigal: I've not done experiments as pat of the group, so would like to
Eliza Madrigal: *part
Pema Pera: yes, Teleo, but in studying appearance we don't focus on *how* it may appear, but on *what* appears
Mickorod Renard: Yea,,I am sorry,,I feel a bit outa league with you guys
Tarmel Udimo: is there an experiment we can link to the paper perhaps
Pema Pera: I like Scathach's idea, to get back to the epoche
Be Ewing: MIckorod - tell me about it :)
Tarmel Udimo: I feel like that too Mick
Pema Pera: as Tarmel just said too
Scathach Rhiadra: yes good idea Tarmel:)
Be Ewing: Pema - what epoche?
Tarmel Udimo: good idea Scat
Mickorod Renard: but I am hangin on in there,,I want to understand
Pema Pera: may I make a suggestion for next week?
Scathach Rhiadra: we all are Mick:)
Mickorod Renard: please
Pema Pera: Let us focus on the epoche, as an experiment: Exploration 12: Husserl's Epoche
Tarmel Udimo: I wouldn't assume that any of us understand Mick (except pema of course)
Pema Pera: and make really sure that we all read it, and try it at least a few times
Pema Pera: and if in addition you have time and interest to read or reread the paper
Pema Pera: http://www.ids.ias.edu/~piet/publ/other/husserlcircle.html
Pema Pera: that is fine too, and it may be interesting to make connections
Scathach Rhiadra: ok, and should we not write reports again too?
Pema Pera: but let us focus our discussion next week from what we find in the epoche
Pema Pera: yes, that would be best, Schathach!
Be Ewing: It comes up on my screen currently no text in page
Pema Pera: by all means!
Pema Pera: there is overlap with previous experiments
Be Ewing: the link at 12:49
Pema Pera: the main difference is:
Pema Pera: the epoche is more general
Pema Pera: covers everything we've done before
Pema Pera: and then some :)
Pema Pera: object, subject, etc
Pema Pera: a different way of living life
Pema Pera: of seeing
Be Ewing: ah ... but gave me second tab immediatley below
Be Ewing: that seems to have some text in it
arabella Ella tiptoes in
Be Ewing: Hi arabella ;)
Pema Pera: ah, is the URL not complete? Let me try again:
Pema Pera: Exploration 12: Husserl's Epoche
arabella Ella: hiya
Pema Pera: hmm, that's a problem with SL chat log
Pema Pera: it doesn't handle the parentheses right
Pema Pera: let me see - thanks for pointing that out, Be!
Tarmel Udimo: (have to tiptoe out, sorry been called in to work they need a replacement - will read log when i get back, sorry)
Mickorod Renard: ok,,saved all the links
Pema Pera: Here is how to go to the epoche page: first go to http://pheno.wik.is/Explorations then click on the bottom line "Husserl's epoche"
Mickorod Renard: Hiya Ara
Pema Pera: by Tarmel!
Fefonz Quan: it works if you cut and paste the whole address to a browser.
Pema Pera: well, this is perhaps a good place to stop for today?
Be Ewing: Pema - that last link works just fine
Pema Pera: unless there are any other burning questions/comments?
Be Ewing: Pema - just one
Be Ewing: you are obviously into total philosophical/scientific mode
Pema Pera: am I?
Pema Pera: :)
Be Ewing: Do you just ever accept everyday life and experience and go from those and share those for discussion?
Alfred Kelberry: pema, i added tinyurl there
Pema Pera: most philosophers would disagree Be :-)
Alfred Kelberry: http://tinyurl.com/dy2d2z
Pema Pera: and indeed, if you go to http://pheno.wik.is/ you will find that we have spent months on that, Be
Pema Pera: Vajra, did you want to add something?
Be Ewing: well -- like I said I'm not a student of philosophy ... moreso just a student of life ... that's where the question is coming from
Pema Pera: please feel free to do so!
Be Ewing: but some how we are all here in the same place right now
Be Ewing: discussing whatever
Vajra Raymaker: Pema, thanks. I'll wait for another time. Thanks for links. I am thinking about Sellars' arguements against the myth of the given
Be Ewing: How does this evening's discussion fit in with phenomenology?
Pema Pera: it is about phenomenology, Be . . . . .
Pema Pera: yes, Vajra?
arabella Ella: altho i missed most of the session today what Pema asks us to do is in line i think with what Sellars said again the Myth of the Given
Be Ewing: I know ... I'm not being clear in my questions
arabella Ella: there are no intermediaries between thinking and the world ... no Given
Fefonz Quan: Need to go, have a great weekend everybody :)
Vajra Raymaker: Teleo's comment made me think of Sellars' concerns about the "myth" of the given, and then that made me wonder whether Sellars' every actully took on Heidegger's reasoning directly. I will have to learn better what all can be bracketed off, according to Heidegger or other people's everyday experience
Myna Maven: (Bye Fefonz)
arabella Ella: bye Fef u too
Mickorod Renard: bye fefonz
Be Ewing: Take care Fefonz :)
Scathach Rhiadra: bye Fefonz, you have a good one too:)
Eliza Madrigal: Bye Fefonz
Fefonz Quan waves
Vajra Raymaker: k, Ara
arabella Ella: Heidegger seems to go further than Sellars IMHO in linking our thinking to the world
Be Ewing: I belive Vajra's question may help me to clarify my question
Pema Pera: Vajra, Heidegger was much more evocative -- interesting for sure, but didn't try to be precise. Husserl in contrast was really trying to be minimal and precise
Pema Pera: it is very interesting to see the contrast between the two
Be Ewing: All these people are referenced historically
Pema Pera: Heidegger starting as a theologian, Husserl as a mathematician
arabella Ella: I find it best to link continental philo to anglo american philo
Pema Pera: both trying to find the ground of Being in some sense, the nature of reatlity
Be Ewing: but what about just experiencing your own experiences about what happens in your life in the here and now without their prior knowledge base biasing you in your creative thiking and perceptions?
Be Ewing: I guess ... that is my my summary question
Pema Pera: what appeals to me about Husserl is that he does experiments, like a scientist
Be Ewing: What is that called?
Pema Pera: or like someone in every day life for that matter
Pema Pera: whether Heidegger narrates about his own intuitions . . . .
arabella Ella: I think the value of what Pema is doing here is moving from experience now on to linking phenemo experience to science
arabella Ella: and to discovery
Teleo Aeon: Pema is there then a good precise example of the proccess in action ? maybe a particular and good experiment which Husserl carried out to good effect ?
Vajra Raymaker: okay, Ara, I will look then for those themes.
Pema Pera: yes, Arabella, but not only to science, more importantly trying to find a framework in which to look at all the experiences we have had -- we need some kind of setting
Mickorod Renard: that sounds useful question teleo
Pema Pera: Teleo, the epoche in general
Pema Pera: and also specific examples
Pema Pera: in his many many writings
Pema Pera: he wrote dozens of books and gave many examples there
Pema Pera: but more interesting is for us to do the experiments ourselves
Pema Pera: and yes, there is a science connection here:
arabella Ella: Pema don't you think Heidegger had better examples of how ourthinking is linked to the world
Teleo Aeon: could you recomand a good one at some time maybe.? that would be a great help I think
Pema Pera: a physicist doesn't study Newton's original writings, but makes calculations like Newton did
Pema Pera: so I suggest that we do experiments *like* Husserl did
Pema Pera: Teleo, I suggest you start with our web site http://pheno.wik.is/Explorations
Teleo Aeon: ok
Pema Pera: we've spent a few months gathering reports
Teleo Aeon: I will
Pema Pera: Husserl's original writing is pretty hard to follow
Teleo Aeon: nods
Pema Pera: and the translations are even harder
Pema Pera: his original German is difficult enough to follow :)
Vajra Raymaker: .
Mickorod Renard: must go now,,thanks pema,,bye everyone
Pema Pera: yes, Arabella, Heidegger does have interesting things to say, for sure
Myna Maven: (Bye Mick)
Be Ewing: Mickorod - Take care :)
Scathach Rhiadra: bye Mick, see you soon
Vajra Raymaker: He changed his views quite a bit too at one point, didn't he (Husserl)????
Pema Pera: if you'd like to gather some quotes, we can discuss those next week, arabella!
arabella Ella: not sure if i can make it next week Pema but the week after is fine for me
arabella Ella: got some RL committments
Pema Pera: oh yes, Vajra, at least five times -- in that way too, he was a scientist, exploring, not worried about changing his views in the light of new evidence
Pema Pera: fine, Arabella
arabella Ella: apologies
Pema Pera: I enormously admire Husserl's intellectual integrity and honesty in being willing to be on record as changing his basic assumptions several times
Pema Pera: when he found sufficient reasons to change them
Pema Pera: few people have that courage -- most just keep biting in the original bone they found
arabella Ella: something i had said here on another occasion ... according to Heidegger we do not just hear creaking but we head a door creaking for example
Pema Pera: yes, certainly!
Pema Pera: that is the experience we have
Pema Pera: and then we can reflect on the experience
arabella Ella: and if I may Pema
arabella Ella: concerning bracketing
Pema Pera: and realize that what we took for a door was an experience of taking that for a door
Pema Pera: yes, Arabella?
arabella Ella: when for example we do foresight ... we bracket all our present experience and baggage ...
arabella Ella: in order to come up with new visions, new scenarios
arabella Ella: and that involves new ideas, creativity
arabella Ella: especially if we use what we learn here with the experiments we have done
Pema Pera: yes, Arabella
Pythagoras Darkfold: I have not read the paper that is a subject of discussion here, but I think that phenomenology could be only thta first stage of our knowledge about the world, processes, events.
Pema Pera: it depends on what kind of knowledge you are looking for, Pythagoras
Pema Pera: knowledge within the world, how it functions, or knowledge about how to see the world as a whole
Teleo Aeon: I would certainly be very ointerested in seeing what it is like to get ones metaphorical teeth into something, using the method though :)
Pythagoras Darkfold: Based on axioms. Then deduced as simple corrolaries...
Pema Pera: yes, always good to try out :)
arabella Ella: Teleo i can tell you what we have done here has given rise to so many insights ... it is amazing
arabella Ella: it is like we ;learn to see things anew
Pema Pera: Well, I have to go now
arabella Ella: bye Pema
Pema Pera: See you all next week, if you have time!