zan wrote:CopperLine wrote:Zan,
You are right in thinking it is most often thought of as a chicken-egg type problem. People mostly can't decide which comes first consciousness or being and whether the latter is dependent on the former or the other way around. Consequently there is a tendency to fall into an inifinite loop.
However very broadly speaking there are two traditions in philosophy, namely idealism and realism. Idealism holds that it is ideas which inform what exists and since ideas are a product of human consciousness it necessarily means that consciousness is prior to and producing of 'things'. In contrast realism holds that what exists is independent of consciousness of its existence.
I've given a very crude (and in some senses misleading) description of these traditions and there is clearly masses to be said about this (and not on a thread about oil !). What I would argue is that these apparently 'abstract' and 'philosophical' questions are actually not only ever present in our daily conversations (including this forum) but are crucial to the way that we seek to undertsand the world even though we are unware most of the time of our 'layman's philosophy'. It is my strongly held conviction that every person is a philosopher whether they like it or not, whether they accept that label or not. To be a human being, to coin a phrase, is to be a philosopher.
I think the oil debate is dead so I see no reason why we can't talk about something else....After all that seems to be the way all threads go anyway.
I know very little about this subject but am always facinated by it.
By what you said above then I must be a Realist because Idealism must need a god for it to exist, as it were.
I really can't see where the confusion is...there are very many living things which exist without being conscious of their existance....Hence you have to exist first to have any chance of being conscious of it...Hence... I am, therefore I think...And I am supposed to be the big idealist in this forum...