engleski

How do we know about Nous?

The question, what mind is, and “how” we know about mind, are closely connected. “Mind” “Nous” “Intellect” is part of what is needed in order for us to know anything at all, but how do we know about mind? What W. Sellars described as the “clash” between “the ‘manifest’ image of man-in-the-world” and “the scientific image” explains the difference between the way we ordinarily express what we perceive to be our experience of ourselves and what modern science asserts is really the case. Neither one, however, is more real than the other. Both are “idealizations”, and cannot answer the question how we know about our own intellect, In asking how we know about Nous we are brought up against the opposition between the “Myth of the Given” (Sellars) and the “Myth of the Subjective” (Davidson). In the history of philosophy, the relationship of thinking and being is the most fundamental relationship, yet neither pole - being itself, thought itself - is directly accessible. In Parmenides' declaration: “The same is to think and to be” (τὸ γὰρ αὐτὸ νοεῖν ἐστίν τε καὶ εἶναι 28Β3 what looks like a simple identity (thought = being) is in fact is not simple at all. Plato’s analogy of the line, perhaps the earliest most seminal passage in the history of the philosophy of mind, provides a key to how this relationship is to be understood, and to the question, how we know about mind. The line is an image of the stages of knowledge, but also of processes of Mind, Nous, Intellect . It represents a proportion, based on a fundamental ratio – logos, according to which – ana ton logon – the line as image of our knowledge of knowledge is constructed. The line reveals itself as the method by which we know about Nous. It is a complex, hypothetical method of indirection grounded in the structures of being and thought.

Nous; intellect; mind; being; knowledge; analogy; hypothesis; Plato

nije evidentirano