Timeline for Is there a name for "inaccessible" concepts
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 28, 2022 at 1:17 | comment | added | David Gudeman | "Noumenal" is a good suggestion, but that's really more about reality that we can't conceive (or have any information about) than it is about concepts that we can't conceive. | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 23:30 | comment | added | user4894 | Reminds me of Donald Rumsfeld's known knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns. Great philosopher, lousy SecDef. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_are_known_knowns | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 19:23 | comment | added | J D | I think Kant's noumenal is as close as you're going to get. Concepts, arguably, are constructed, and do not exist independent of cognition. Constructivism in Math. | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 17:08 | comment | added | Kristian Berry | I'd say the term you're looking for is noumenal. Noumenal thought processes are limits; Kant says, for example, that we don't know why space and time are the two forms of our intuition, or why the categories are the twelve forms of our discursion. "Something like space or time or something like the categories" is a description that can be satisfied only by information to which we don't have sufficient access. | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 16:05 | comment | added | Uro | This indeed sounds like it's close. Am I right in saying that "humanly inaccessible" would refer to our mysteries as humans, that "weakly inaccessible" would refer to "any problem or mystery that are solvable but will never be solved in our universe" and that "strongly inaccessible" would refer to "mysteries that fundamentally cannot be just 'problems' for any theoretical being within the constraints of our laws of physics"? | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 14:06 | comment | added | J Kusin | This sounds like how Chomsky views limits of biology. He identifies mysteries vs problems. Anything biological has limits of what it can conceive, although not necessarily what it can solve brutely without conceiving. Mysteries are those “concepts” forever beyond biological conceiving and problems are conceivable fully. Each species has its own mysteries and problems, and only some mysteries can be turned into problems by careful practice. Humans can interact with mysteries at surface level but never deep understanding. More powerful organisms than us could resolve our mysteries. | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 12:22 | answer | added | CriglCragl | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 10:22 | comment | added | Uro | It is more of a curiosity question as a whole for my own sake as I would like to try to think of ways to incorporate such elements in a science-fiction/fantasy setting. Hence why I'd like to be using the proper name for it (if there is one) and reading about it to learn subtleties I could have missed to avoid possible inconsistencies. | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 10:14 | comment | added | Uro | Of course we can't, but I don't pretend otherwise, we can still give this kind of concept a name even if we can't point out to specific ones, and we could probably reflect on the implications of whether or not such concepts exist. The last sentence in my post is just for my curiosity, I don't have a philosophy background. | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 10:09 | comment | added | Mauro ALLEGRANZA | How can we conceive an "unconcivable" concept? | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 8:50 | history | edited | Uro | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Rearranged the question, renamed inaccessibles
|
| S Mar 27, 2022 at 8:43 | review | First questions | |||
| Mar 30, 2022 at 16:38 | |||||
| S Mar 27, 2022 at 8:43 | history | asked | Uro | CC BY-SA 4.0 |