I disagree with this presupposition, RightWhale. As William James wrote, "Great thinkers have vast premonitory glimpses of schemes of relation between terms, which hardly even as verbal images enter the mind, so rapid is the whole process." We are not speaking at all of "sensation" here. He adds to this statement a footnote:
Mozart describes thus his manner of composing: First bits and crumbs of the piece come and gradually join together in his mind; then the soul getting warmed to the work, the thing grows more and more, "and I spread it out broader and clearer, and at last it gets almost finished in my head, even when it is a long piece, so that I can see the whole of it at a single glance in my mind, as if it were a beautiful painting or a handsome human being; in which way I do not hear it in my imagination at all as a succession -- the way it must come later -- but all at once, as it were. It is a rare feast! All the inventing and making goes on in me as in a beautiful strong dream. But the best of all is the hearing of it all at once. [I added the bolds]Notice that Mozart uses analogies to vision and hearing in his description of the creative process; but there's not a scintilla of "sense impression" going on here. This creative process is entirely internal to the mind.
You wrote: "Of course we create nothing, not even our society (all attempts are doomed), that is the baliwick of the Divine."
Tell that to Mozart!
Thank you both - #s 282 and 278 have good stuff for me in them! I’m reading along, hoping what’s bouncing around inside will coalesce and come out again somehow creatively!
Fine, but what else is there?
I thought Coytoteman said science doesn't DO philosophy? You ever seen a drag queen? Underneath the women's underwear, and the garish make up....., well, you don't have to have TACTILE EXPERIENCE to know what you know, which is that it is just a man who is confused.
So the "scientist" who makes comprehensive statements about the nature of reality, even to the extent of formulating "laws" of science. Here we are ensconced in a tiny corner of our galaxy, Which is just one in billions, and these people pompously assert that "this is the nature of matter/energy...." and "this is how matter/energy reacts under these circumstances"???????
He might claim to be doing science, but he is just a drag queen philosopher who is too confused to know it.
Without a whole gaggle of philosophical assumptions about the universe, the scientist cannot make a statement more comprehensive than "I think this just happened." (Even that statement is philosophically derived, but we will let him pass). A scientist can no more discover the nature of things than a child counting drops out of the faucet can discover the properties of water. The very BEST you can say about a scientist with no philosophical base is that he is a stastician.