Philosophy Now Forum

In asking this I am querying whether ideas are independent of their historical context. My understanding of eternal is of being timeless, or recurrent. In speaking of ideas, I am referring to basic concepts which are universal. Such ideas have been described by Plato and Jung as archetypes, such as goodness, justice, beauty, perfection and justice.

The issue is whether the ideas are independent of space and time. In other words, would the ideas exist in all possible worlds? If this is true, the basic concepts would remain even if all human beings and sentient forms became extinct. Of course, at the present time, some cultural remnants may remain stored as information on technology. Even the fact that ideas can be stored as information suggests that ideas exist as information independent of human minds.

I am inclined to see ideas as independent of human minds, but it is a tricky issue. That is because the existence of concepts is dependent on an observer or thinker. Ideas are constructed through consciousness, involving the brain and nervous system. Some thinkers have seen ideas as innate whereas others have seen the mind as a 'blank slate'. I would argue that the concept of a blank slate seems contradicted by the way in which key concepts develop in all cultures independently of language differences. What do you think? Are ideas eternal?

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am In asking this I am querying whether ideas are independent of their historical context. My understanding of eternal is of being timeless, or recurrent. In speaking of ideas, I am referring to basic concepts which are universal. Such ideas have been described by Plato and Jung as archetypes, such as goodness, justice, beauty, perfection and justice.

The issue is whether the ideas are independent of space and time. In other words, would the ideas exist in all possible worlds?

What do you mean by 'worlds' here, exactly'?

How the Universe is HERE, NOW is the One and only way ALL things COULD BE.

But, by your use of the two words 'possible worlds' you might be meaning something else?

Also, if 'ideas' are things that 'arise' within human bodies, only, then obviously 'ideas', themselves, are NOT eternal.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am If this is true, the basic concepts would remain even if all human beings and sentient forms became extinct.

But, what are the so-called 'basic concepts/s', exactly?

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am Of course, at the present time, some cultural remnants may remain stored as information on technology. Even the fact that ideas can be stored as information suggests that ideas exist as information independent of human minds.

These are no things as 'human minds'.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am I am inclined to see ideas as independent of human minds, but it is a tricky issue. That is because the existence of concepts is dependent on an observer or thinker. Ideas are constructed through consciousness, involving the brain and nervous system. Some thinkers have seen ideas as innate whereas others have seen the mind as a 'blank slate'. I would argue that the concept of a blank slate seems contradicted by the way in which key concepts develop in all cultures independently of language differences. What do you think? Are ideas eternal?

If you define the 'ideas' word here, then 'we' better answer 'your question' here, for you.

I can not think your thoughts- I have enough trouble with my own

-Imp

Age wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 11:17 am

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am In asking this I am querying whether ideas are independent of their historical context. My understanding of eternal is of being timeless, or recurrent. In speaking of ideas, I am referring to basic concepts which are universal. Such ideas have been described by Plato and Jung as archetypes, such as goodness, justice, beauty, perfection and justice.

The issue is whether the ideas are independent of space and time. In other words, would the ideas exist in all possible worlds?

What do you mean by 'worlds' here, exactly'?

How the Universe is HERE, NOW is the One and only way ALL things COULD BE.

But, by your use of the two words 'possible worlds' you might be meaning something else?

Also, if 'ideas' are things that 'arise' within human bodies, only, then obviously 'ideas', themselves, are NOT eternal.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am If this is true, the basic concepts would remain even if all human beings and sentient forms became extinct.

But, what are the so-called 'basic concepts/s', exactly?

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am Of course, at the present time, some cultural remnants may remain stored as information on technology. Even the fact that ideas can be stored as information suggests that ideas exist as information independent of human minds.

These are no things as 'human minds'.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am I am inclined to see ideas as independent of human minds, but it is a tricky issue. That is because the existence of concepts is dependent on an observer or thinker. Ideas are constructed through consciousness, involving the brain and nervous system. Some thinkers have seen ideas as innate whereas others have seen the mind as a 'blank slate'. I would argue that the concept of a blank slate seems contradicted by the way in which key concepts develop in all cultures independently of language differences. What do you think? Are ideas eternal?

If you define the 'ideas' word here, then 'we' better answer 'your question' here, for you.

In many respects the idea of 'possible worlds' is metaphorical for all possible ways of seeing. However, in relation to the universe it is not possible to say whether there have or have not been other universes. It is possible that universes are born and die, but to know for sure is beyond the capability of the human being.

When I speak of human minds, I am referring to mental states as opposed to entities. Neither minds or self are entities but about interior and experiential reference points.

When I ask about ideas, I am talking of all concepts. Even the idea of time is an idea or the concept of the universe. There are differing variations of ideas and unique formulations of concepts but with underlying structures of philosophical structure, as demonstrated in the history of ideas.

Impenitent wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 12:06 pm I can not think your thoughts- I have enough trouble with my own

-Imp

You are not compelled to think my thoughts. I am not wishing to preach but simply engage in discussion of philosophy. But, you are welcome to express the 'trouble' you have with your own thoughts here. That may be the benefit of having a philosophy forum.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 12:19 pm

Impenitent wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 12:06 pm I can not think your thoughts- I have enough trouble with my own

-Imp

You are not compelled to think my thoughts. I am not wishing to preach but simply engage in discussion of philosophy. But, you are welcome to express the 'trouble' you have with your own thoughts here. That may be the benefit of having a philosophy forum.

I think Imp means Imp can not even think Imp's own thoughts.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am Are ideas eternal?

Nope.

'Eternal' is an idea.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 12:46 pm

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am Are ideas eternal?

Nope.

'Eternal' is an idea.

Eternal or eternity is an idea but it has some validity and significance in thinking. If you do not believe that ideas are eternal, why?

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 1:21 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 12:46 pm

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am Are ideas eternal?

Nope.

'Eternal' is an idea.

Eternal or eternity is an idea but it has some validity and significance in thinking. If you do not believe that ideas are eternal, why?

Why because ideas are just ideas, what is an idea, I've no idea.
Words such as 'eternal' or 'eternity' or 'time' or 'now', are concepts known now. Nothing exists except this present moment.
This is what its like to not exist.

Are ideas merely subjective? Or, are they anything beyond the individual thinker? There is the idea of objectivity, but also intersubjectivity. This implies the connections between subjective understanding. It could imply a certain amount of objectivity, or distance from subjectivity. On the other hand, it could signify empathy in understanding between individuals in thinking.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 2:08 pm

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 1:21 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 12:46 pm

Nope.

'Eternal' is an idea.

Eternal or eternity is an idea but it has some validity and significance in thinking. If you do not believe that ideas are eternal, why?

Why because ideas are just ideas, what is an idea, I've no idea.
Words such as 'eternal' or 'eternity' or 'time' or 'now', are concepts known now. Nothing exists except this present moment.
This is what its like to not exist.

The present moment is a framing of understanding but merges into past and future on an ongoing basis. Non existence is more complex because it is abstract and outside of ego consciousness. It is not possible to be aware of non existence directly. It has collapsed into the realm of ideas beyond a person's direct awareness.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 12:15 pm

Age wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 11:17 am

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am In asking this I am querying whether ideas are independent of their historical context. My understanding of eternal is of being timeless, or recurrent. In speaking of ideas, I am referring to basic concepts which are universal. Such ideas have been described by Plato and Jung as archetypes, such as goodness, justice, beauty, perfection and justice.

The issue is whether the ideas are independent of space and time. In other words, would the ideas exist in all possible worlds?

What do you mean by 'worlds' here, exactly'?

How the Universe is HERE, NOW is the One and only way ALL things COULD BE.

But, by your use of the two words 'possible worlds' you might be meaning something else?

Also, if 'ideas' are things that 'arise' within human bodies, only, then obviously 'ideas', themselves, are NOT eternal.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am If this is true, the basic concepts would remain even if all human beings and sentient forms became extinct.

But, what are the so-called 'basic concepts/s', exactly?

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am Of course, at the present time, some cultural remnants may remain stored as information on technology. Even the fact that ideas can be stored as information suggests that ideas exist as information independent of human minds.

These are no things as 'human minds'.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am I am inclined to see ideas as independent of human minds, but it is a tricky issue. That is because the existence of concepts is dependent on an observer or thinker. Ideas are constructed through consciousness, involving the brain and nervous system. Some thinkers have seen ideas as innate whereas others have seen the mind as a 'blank slate'. I would argue that the concept of a blank slate seems contradicted by the way in which key concepts develop in all cultures independently of language differences. What do you think? Are ideas eternal?

If you define the 'ideas' word here, then 'we' better answer 'your question' here, for you.

In many respects the idea of 'possible worlds' is metaphorical for all possible ways of seeing. However, in relation to the universe it is not possible to say whether there have or have not been other universes. It is possible that universes are born and die, but to know for sure is beyond the capability of the human being.

Here 'we' can see, VERY CLEARLY, another PRIME EXAMPLE of while one is 'currently' BELIEVING some thing to be, ABSOLUTELY, true, then they are ABSOLUTELY CLOSED and thus ABSOLUTELY UNABLE to LEARN and DISCOVER what the ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE Truth is, exactly

Look, you are ABSOLUTELY FREE to BELIEVE ABSOLUTELY ANY thing you like, for example: that there are MANY universes and/or that you are ABSOLUTELY UNABLE to KNOW some things. But, AGAIN, what you BELIEVE is true is NOT necessarily true AT ALL.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 12:15 pm When I speak of human minds, I am referring to mental states as opposed to entities. Neither minds or self are entities but about interior and experiential reference points.

Who cares?

There is NO such things as 'human minds', just like thee is NO such thing as 'universes'.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 12:15 pm When I ask about ideas, I am talking of all concepts. Even the idea of time is an idea or the concept of the universe. There are differing variations of ideas and unique formulations of concepts but with underlying structures of philosophical structure, as demonstrated in the history of ideas.

And, ALL ideas only began AFTER you human beings began, right?

If yes, the ideas are NOT eternal.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 11:58 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 2:08 pm

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 1:21 pm

Eternal or eternity is an idea but it has some validity and significance in thinking. If you do not believe that ideas are eternal, why?

Why because ideas are just ideas, what is an idea, I've no idea.
Words such as 'eternal' or 'eternity' or 'time' or 'now', are concepts known now. Nothing exists except this present moment.
This is what its like to not exist.

The present moment is a framing of understanding but merges into past and future on an ongoing basis. Non existence is more complex because it is abstract and outside of ego consciousness. It is not possible to be aware of non existence directly. It has collapsed into the realm of ideas beyond a person's direct awareness.

I don't know why you write many of your words in capital letters. My understanding of such practice is that it is equivalent to shouting. It does not make your arguments any more effective in such an emphasis .

It is hard to know whether ideas existed before or after humans created them. It would be fair enough to argue for the latter, although it could be argued equally that ideas are realised by humans. It comes down to whether humans are the originators, as creators, or whether the source of ideas extends beyond human consciousness and construction.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 10:18 am In asking this I am querying whether ideas are independent of their historical context. My understanding of eternal is of being timeless, or recurrent. In speaking of ideas, I am referring to basic concepts which are universal. Such ideas have been described by Plato and Jung as archetypes, such as goodness, justice, beauty, perfection and justice.
.........

From the perspective and claims of Plato, ideas are universal and absolutely real;

WIKI wrote:The theory suggests that the physical world is not as real or true as "Forms". According to this theory, Forms—conventionally capitalized and also commonly translated as "Ideas"[4]—are the non-physical, timeless, absolute, and unchangeable essences of all things, of which objects and matter in the physical world are merely imitations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_forms

Note the criticism of the above:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of ... onic_Forms

Critique by Hume
According to Hume's position on ideas and causation, the existence of Plato's Forms and Knowledge cannot be proved because they cannot be observed. The reason they cannot be observed is that they are novel, never having been glimpsed, and would be unrecognizable to any observer.
https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Hume-vs- ... XRYFPBYRPA

Critique by Kant
In terms of the relationship between the sensible and the ideated, Kant takes his own work to suture the divide between the two, while holding fast to a metaphysically sound articulation of the role and place of the ideas.
Plato, in Kant’s view, went much too far in the direction of a fanciful flight where understanding directs itself not to sensibility, thereby structuring experience, but out and away – toward the ideated, thus producing not concepts valid for experience, but merely phantasms.
https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/ ... ml?lang=en

For Kant, ideas are thoughts that are not entangled with experience [sensibility] thus cannot be verified and justified as real, e.g. scientific concepts.

So, ideas are eternal and beyond space and time according to Plato, but Plato's ideas are merely illusions and not scientifically nor empirically real.

Jack Daydream wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 11:48 pm Are ideas merely subjective? Or, are they anything beyond the individual thinker? There is the idea of objectivity, but also intersubjectivity. This implies the connections between subjective understanding. It could imply a certain amount of objectivity, or distance from subjectivity. On the other hand, it could signify empathy in understanding between individuals in thinking.

There is not even anything beyond individual subjectivity. Even the concept of knowing there is an ''individual thinker'' is an idea.

Both the words objectivity and intersubjectivity are ideas.

Empathy is an idea.

Where are all these ideas, in deep dreamless sleep, or in the baby who lies inside it's mothers womb?

Ideas are a mental formation. And even the mind is an idea.

What is an idea? I have an idea, or I have no idea.


Nothing exists except this present moment. What is this moment? I have no idea, or I have an idea?

This moment is all there is, was and ever will be. There is nothing outside of this present moment that is not also this present moment.
This is it. This is all there is.

An idea.

And the dream is all there is. In other words, there is nothing in the word, except an idea.

Nothing is happening.