tadmjones

Automatization is memory. Asking ‘when’ was really about questioning the idea of ‘tabula rasa’ , because without innate ideas as content, they need to be created by individual experience and mental functioning. I’ve never been comfortable with the idea of innate faculties without content that results in individuals experiencing universal qualities. And I’m very pro-consciousness ,lol. Especially of late, I now see primacy of existence as a formulation of pure, hard, or strict physicalism. I’ve lost my faith in matter independent of awareness, consciousness. I say loss of faith based on the realization that I’ve always accepted the idea that the external , objective world is ‘made’ of matter. And that matter is a substance and different in being than awareness. If philosophy is to provide explanation of my relationship to reality, the primary axiom is I am, pure awareness. Objectivism as system is a way to navigate the relationship between human intellect/cognition and the external/objective world. But it doesn’t say much about the relationship between my awareness and reality.

You are chiding a critic because you doubt their grasp of the subject matter. If emotions are products of recall, then it should stand to reason that an explanation of how the functioning of memory as an aid to cognition would be pertinent and its lack could suggest a less than conclusive investigation. As it is obvious by my use of the webs , I do not see an entry in the Lexicon for 'memory', are you aware of other sources , or do you think that subject isn't as tied to emotional response as I am considering?

So memory is infallible ?

When does one start to make conscious value judgements in a rational schema that then directs the contents of an emotional response or recognition thereof?( in O'ism)

Well the front for money laundering SBF ran was a purported 'movement' called that, too. In non O'ist terms rational altruism would be synonymous/analogous to benevolence. The 'rational' qualifies the 'evil', metaphorically or course.

Nothing wrong with a little rational altruism.

Historically some of the high brows were pretty racist and commie/fascist.

Is the subjectivist-mindedness a causal factor in their misapprehension of non dogma as dogma? The critique does usually seem to come from an unsatisfying practice of personal ethics and moralization. Premise checkers don’t normally seem to have disagreements with politics or capitalism.

Non contradictory identification isn’t as much an art as it is a crucible. In its most physicalist form , the chemical reactions in a crucible do not follow the play of art and the molecules don’t produce any contradictions of identity.

Not sure where to point for exposition but I'm sure there are descriptions of the concept of the hierarchy of value(s). "Proper" value seeking in O'ism doesn't necessarily distinguish between values, all values being moral, as 'kinds' more like 'degrees'.

First what is the colloquial, or non O’ist difference?, assuming there is a well established ‘one’ to point to or notion you have in mind.

In Oism a value is that which one acts to gain or keep. Colloquially value is understood as intrinsically beneficial , Oism claims a system of discernment of choice is needed to avoid obtaining ‘dis-value(s)’.

How do you get from axioms to ordinality?

How does Aristotle use ‘life’ ? As being , as the recognizable actions of being or the less sinew-y and more fundamental ground of experience of being? It seems the the actuality of thought being life, would place life in awareness as such.

He speaks to the separate aspects of the intellect from a much less than a hard materialist frame. I’ve haven’t read any of his books , but I’ve seen him speak about his ideas around the division and interactions between the hemispheres of the brain and the interplay between the characteristics of each. I believe his first most talked about book was “The Master and His Emissary “