RdW - That is what we have hypotheses for that we can test, or values that we can try. ... Value is what we found out to be good and want to hold on to.
Lk4 - Im sorry: I cannot let this lay. this is a definition that gains creedence only in a non-reflective subject. Such non-reflection does gain a subject, but it does so in reflection of the object: you propose that the subject is an object amoung objects. You argue from the perspective that the subject came about from a knowable apriroi universe
RdW - From the depths of our being to the outmost periphery, we recollect and construct forms we believe, will fit the content of our world intuitively yet precisely, until we realize our dream or we realize our mistake. In reality, a part of reality reflects itself, which therefore in turn reflects or intuits itself and its environment, others or reality. You and the other intuit your and the other's intuition and realization as best as you can, so that you can co-ordinate communication. (
#19)
RdW - I call it Constructive Recollection. The subject does reflect upon itself. Intuition is the subject and reality is the object:
Lk4 - It is obvious that you are attempting to 'construct' an 'proper' way of coming upon the universe so as to achieve some ethical ideal. What is recollecting? The subject: the given. The reflection you propose is limited in that it takes objectivity as the standpoint from which to propose truths. The subject then may reflect constructively. The subject may 'value' as a apirori category that we 'find out' from what? From some empty
nilthat is the subject when viewed from the object. When did we 'find out' our value? How or in what way do we or can we 'hold on to' that value that we found? How can I have a condition of myself that is capable of 'finding out' what I value?
RdW - The reflection I promote is Bergson's 'duality of origin' (1932,
p79). The subject or intution dynamically interacts with the object or reality, using that part of reality capable of reflecting upon itself. The form may be non-reflective but the content isn't. Material reality evolved while cultural reality acquired history. What is recollected is the intuition or reflection of reality that is valuable because it works or is functionally structured, at different levels, by independent confirmation. Cultural content deconstructed to nil applies to dependent rejection or power-distance between people, to water down and take the trauma out of its raw form of kidnapping and terror and 'stabilize' it into a closed morality of political correctness and static religion, quite the contrary of its claim.
Lk4 - The only way for this to happen if if the subject, the individual, stops investigation and orients it in a particular direction. Thus your system argues itself, as I have indicated in my above post.
Because the previous statement is true (the sentence just before this), that the subject may stop (that is: may choose), this stopping is evidence that we might 'find value', since at the point of stopping, we have allowed for a uninvestigated given, and thus this given informs what we may know, grants us the Subject as an essential thing in-itself from which to posit truth.
RdW - The independent individual seeks and when found, follows independent confirmation of his intuition by realization, as is or should be common practice in more or less ancient institutions such as science, justice and journalism. Ever more precisely does his intuition describe, explain and understand reality this way, even being part of reality, itself. This is both reflective and investigative.
Lk4 - Yet this condition does not set well with those who are oriented upon the object, because the scheme itself would argue back to the vicious circle of contingency of condition and nullify what it proposes. Thus, what occurs is exactly what you have done: you have 'stopped' the cycle in order to gain a truth of the mater, a philsophical system, which only gains its truth by denying the very process by which it is supposed to have come about.
RdW - Valuing is part of the (reflected or non-reflected) empirical cycle of social action and social reaction. Independent confirmation functionally structures the mind at each level in a different way, to process all content. There is no stopping or denying anything.
Lk4 - Post-modernism is the inevitable result of our condition of knowledge, taken on a whole. Individualized knowledge, such as we might 'find' subjective value in the objective, does not wish to consider the whole, only the parts which is 'valued' by the individual: and thus your scheme denies itself.
Reality is given at all times. To divy up peices of reality and arrange them in some way is, by definition: an ideology. a thoughtful arrangement I thus term: ideological engineering.
RdW - Postmodernism experimented with the absence or deconstruction of anything that should contain truth or what could be independently confirmed. It dominated life from the 60s to recently (appearance of internet) even in science, justice and journalism. Rather than shaping up, it was easier to turn on, tune in and drop out in a world without Truth, God, Reality or Self. Internet encouraged the independent individual to find things out for himself again, turned leadership into followership and power-distance into independent confirmation.
Thanks for your contribution!