Zone1 intersubjectivity

[scruffy]

I wasn't sure where to put this thread, it's about the views we have of other people - so it touches on ethics, which is why it's here.

The topic is "intersubjectivity", which is philosophy - mostly phenomenology.

A main proponent of this view is Edmund Husserl. (You can Google on husserlian intersubjectivity).

The central claims are:

Fundamental to all relationships is "empathy", which means a belief that if I'm looking at the same thing you are, I'm going to see the same thing.

Intersubjectivity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And for a slightly more advanced summary

Edmund Husserl (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

plato.stanford.edu

 

[sparky]

What does Husserl mean by intersubjectivity?


For Husserl, intersubjectivity means the condition whereby I maintain the assumption. that the world as it presents itself to me is the same world as it presents itself to you, not. because you can 'read my mind' but because I assume that if you were in my place you. would see it the way I see it.

Are we not the sum of our experiences?
~S~

 

[rampart]

I wasn't sure where to put this thread, it's about the views we have of other people - so it touches on ethics, which is why it's here.

The topic is "intersubjectivity", which is philosophy - mostly phenomenology.

A main proponent of this view is Edmund Husserl. (You can Google on husserlian intersubjectivity).

The central claims are:

Fundamental to all relationships is "empathy", which means a belief that if I'm looking at the same thing you are, I'm going to see the same thing.

Intersubjectivity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And for a slightly more advanced summary

Edmund Husserl (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

plato.stanford.edu

i kind of like that definition of empathy, scruff.

.

 

[lg325]

On Jury duty, we all had seen and heard the same evidence and testimony but all saw it differently once we all spoke individually about our view and we discussed it we came to the same conclusion.

 

[rampart]

On Jury duty, we all had seen and heard the same evidence and testimony but all saw it differently once we all spoke individually about our view and we discussed it we came to the same conclusion.

if the jury is not doing that the state is wasting those parking validations.

good thread for definitions. this time "consensus" thanks lg

 

[ding]

The "world" or reality presents itself to everyone exactly the same. Not everyone necessarily perceives it the same way though. That doesn't mean that there aren't times when they don't. Some of the time, some of the people can. But often times most people see what they want to see and discard what they don't want to see. The root cause of this is subjectivity or bias. Which is usually the result of having a preference for an outcome.

 

[rampart]

The "world" or reality presents itself to everyone exactly the same. Not everyone necessarily perceives it the same way though. That doesn't mean that there aren't times when they don't. Some of the time, some of the people can. But often times most people see what they want to see and discard what they don't want to see. The root cause of this is subjectivity or bias. Which is usually the result of having a preference for an outcome.

and a thumbs up for the obscure simon and garfunkle reference. i had to hum "the boxer" to get it. thanks.

 

[ding]

and a thumbs up for the obscure simon and garfunkle reference. i had to hum "the boxer" to get it. thanks.

Sorry about that. It's a distribution. Which can sometimes be hard to communicate to others. I've had people argue that no one can ever be objective about anything which is a ridiculous proposition. People can be objective. It's just hard to be objective about everything all the time. But that's where peace lives. Here is an intentional reference to some poetry... I hope for nothing. I fear nothing. I am free.