Posts tagged ‘modal’

Modal Philosophy

The primary problem I’m facing now is deceptively simple; what are modes?  Combine this with the statement that each occurrence is necessarily unique in some respects, and it becomes obvious that primarily modality is an artifact of a representational system or systems, although it is real in various respects.  It affects action (because it affects perception); modes can be shared (to some extent they have to be, because society per se is a product of shared perceptions which are the products of modes) and have stability.  A repetitive characteristic of modes is the assumption of the norm; what is experienced “now” (variously defined) is what has been and will be.  [Adaptation is the product most of all of pain.]  Modes are absolutely not exclusive.  Exclusive modes are the product of abstraction; Dooyeveert’s choice of “justice” as a mode was perhaps as perfect an example of this as could exist.  Modes as we know them descriptively are lingually-derived.  Experience itself is and must be pre-lingual.  The behaviorists and Freudians both might or might not argue.  If “conscious” experience then is lingual free will in most is arguable.


This is a tiny fragment of what I’ve been muttering about having thought about for forty years.  I’ve finally come to some actual conclusions.  Sort of; my philosophy doesn’t actually allow for absolutes, odd as that may seem.  The true origin lies in the meeting of Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Luther, and Calvin of all things.  Throw in a little Bible (I did read it three times) and a few other books, plus at least a million words I’ve written (I’ve probably managed to get a thousand published).

September 27, 2008 at 4:12 am Leave a comment

methodology and methods of definition

The actual problem with a discipline like philosophy is as obvious as it is painful; presumably those who proudly presume to pursue it do so with the proper grandeur of those who can afford invisible clothes.


It would seem to begin with as simple an observation of the concept of “truth”, and even in only one respect; is it simple, or is it complex? and the answer, unfortunately, is that it is complex.  It is, and it ever shall be, and this has been the doom of a great many people.


[definitely notes toward]

April 25, 2008 at 9:31 pm Leave a comment