In a less existentialist sense, this theory seems like Heisenberg's
Uncertainty Principle.
While there is a point of true reality, we cannot define it, because our
own observations affect that reality.
What do you think?
Thanks
Elliot
eharkavy@mitre.org
_______________________________________________________________________________
Subject: InterSubjective Reality LO2191
From: Doug Seeley: Compuserve 100433.133 somewhere on the road in Canada
Date: 7/23/95 0:17
>>" There are different philosophical perspectives that drive the
different arguments due to the assumptions one makes relevant to the
philosophical position they hold. For example, I hold that there is no
such thing as objectivity. There is instead only one reality, and that is
intersubjective. This is consistent with the multitude of sage folks in
their studies of perception - why do people see different things given the
>>same stimulus?....."
John, I was really interested in your philosophical perspective, and what
the process was whereby You came to the conclusion of a single
Intersubjective Reality, since that is the perspecitive which I also have.
My route to getting to this perspective was very roundabout, passing
through Lao Tzu, Alan Watts, synchronicity, ancient Yoga and Rumi's
Beloved, and a curmudgeon of a metaphysician whom I know in Australia. I
also know that there some echos of this in the Hebraic notion of Elohim, a
plural God, and not the singular entity which is suggested by the English
renderings of the Bible which seem to completely distort the original
meaning.
Would You be willing to share your background on getting to your
perspective??
I personally feel that ideas engendered from such a perspective could
really contribute to ways of facilitating the learning organization.
Suffice to say that it is my underlying perspective for how emergent
learning works.