Inventing categories and slicing up the world is not yet inventing a world; it could amount to destroying it, or rather, destroying oneself. To invent a world requires systemic consistency, which is beyond any individual to accomplish. The choice presented to us appears to be like this: will you choose the increasing absurd world we offer to you for free, or are you willing to work hard with others to make a world that is consistent, therefore real. It appears we have not yet had a world that was wholly real.
I misread ‘word’. Apologies. While categories are contingent, the consistency and therefore the integrity of the real is not contingent. For any given set of mutually consistent categories there is only one way to put them together that works. Everything else leads to failure and some degree of self-nihilation. Many of the categories and concepts recently created are not consistent with the world as we know it, which contains some highly integrated categories that cannot be just denied or ignored without consequences. Sooner or later this will prevent those who accept the new categories from consistently realising their intentions.
Love the conclusion! I wonder what you would think about my series "Deus sive Qualia" as it also grapples with the fundamentality of consciousness.
Anyway great read!
This is an interesting angle, even if does not quite relate to the object-identity which was the topic of the article.
Inventing categories and slicing up the world is not yet inventing a world; it could amount to destroying it, or rather, destroying oneself. To invent a world requires systemic consistency, which is beyond any individual to accomplish. The choice presented to us appears to be like this: will you choose the increasing absurd world we offer to you for free, or are you willing to work hard with others to make a world that is consistent, therefore real. It appears we have not yet had a world that was wholly real.
I misread ‘word’. Apologies. While categories are contingent, the consistency and therefore the integrity of the real is not contingent. For any given set of mutually consistent categories there is only one way to put them together that works. Everything else leads to failure and some degree of self-nihilation. Many of the categories and concepts recently created are not consistent with the world as we know it, which contains some highly integrated categories that cannot be just denied or ignored without consequences. Sooner or later this will prevent those who accept the new categories from consistently realising their intentions.