maj 9, 2013 § 1 kommentar
I begin my blog with a sculpture I believe is called ”We” by Jaume Plensa, photographed in Prague, I believe, by flickr user Arenamontanuas. It illustrates so well the concept of Conceptual Reality that I hypothesize upon and will be trying to describe in this following blog.
Let me introduce what I call ”the Conceptual Reality”, an ontological object I figured out a few months ago while trying not to contradict myself when saying that ”language cannot describe reality” in a Facebook discussion. I don’t know if I am the first to have come up with this concept and hypothesis of a ”Conceptual Reality”: There must be some philosopher out there that has come up with a concept similar to mine. But maybe not, who knows? Ontologically, it is the reality mathematics would be a natural part of, and mathematics is something philosophers have a hard time of figuring out.
OK, here is my introduction to what I call ”Conceptual Reality”:
”The Conceptual Reality” is created or generated where the objective reality and the subjective reality meet. There, in ”the Conceptual Reality”, concepts are generated for the sake of orientation in the ”potential force field” between the subject and the object. ”The Conceptual Reality” is not equivalent with either the objective reality or the subjective reality, though all of these are ”real” in their sense of real. The concepts generated in ”the Conceptual Reality” carry meaning both in the objective and subjective realities, for the direct reason that these concepts couple the objective and subjective realities by ramifying into the objective and subjective areas. This is exactly the reason why we sometimes have a hard time distinguishing Conceptual Reality from objective reality, or distinguishing Conceptual Reality from subjective reality. Therein lies the strength of Conceptual Reality, but also the reason why Conceptual Reality is so hard to figure out: that it is an emergent reality totally in its own right.
One main component in the conceptual reality is language..
Here is the logical problem that led me to outline the Conceptual Reality: The logical formula ”Language cannot describe reality” (which causes a contradiction in the traditional way of speaking) can be changed to the formula: ”The conceptual phrase [(the conceptual) language cannot describe (the objective) reality] is claimed to be true in the conceptual sphere/reality;” and thus does not create a contradiction. The contradiction is avoided by letting the formula and phrase belong to another reality (i.e. the conceptual reality) other than the (objective) reality the formula is speaking about. (I’m not a good enough logician to see if there is any problem here, who knows?)
After the conceiving of ”the Conceptual Reality”, for the sake of argument, I actually found that this discovery of an overbearing ”Conceptual Reality” had real explanatory power. Its reality is real for its own sake, and has a whole life of its own, without need for justification from somewhere else. The conceptual reality is the real reality of humans, the reality of life. We have a hard time knowing the truth of either subjective or objective reality; but the conceptual truths are more real for us than either the subjective or objective truths can ever be, because they have more meaning for us, because we orientate ourselves through the medium of conceptual realty. The truths of conceptual reality are really real to us because only they have real meaning for us. Everything from the other realities, from men or from God, must be disclosed to us through conceptual reality and conceptual truth. That’s why conceptual reality is the only reality that could ever matter to us at the end of the day. What I’m trying to say is that, even if conceptual reality is dependent on other realities, its reality is truly emergent and is real enough to be taken seriously and cannot be broken down into more rudimentary elements unless they are themselves elements of the conceptual universe.
Conceptual Reality also answers some hard questions. For instance, since language is an integral part of the conceptual reality, contradictions may flourish and even have meaningful usage in the conceptual reality, since contradictions can be readily accomplished in human language. Objective and subjective reality doesn’t really have anything to say about this. Conceptual reality also explains the nature of mathematics, since mathematics and logic can be seen as a sort of formalized languages.
I hope this will open up new insights, and I will be referring to the blog in later blogs.