Back to H.F. Philosophy contents
[2]Pedantically, categorematicity.
[3]I exercise my right to adapt the common words "modality" and "attitude" to this discussion as I wish. I cede no authority to academic jargon.
[4]It is extraneous to raise the question of whether fiction can or need be life-like. I am concerned with the logical definition of fiction--often reinforced by a legal disclaimer on the verso of a novel.
[5]1994. This assertion of non-intellectual epistemology is ill-considered philosophically. The portrayed non-intellectual realm cannot be autonomously fundamental. The portrayal is unavoidably compromised by the delusion--especially the language.
[6]Cf. my "Studies in the Person-World" (1985), in which I discuss the question of how the subject discerns which "daydreams" are memories.
[7]Eastern mysticism traditionally considered this question to be legitimate.
[8]When a cat crouches beside a mouse hole, is it consciously oriented toward a future?--does it have an avowed expectation?
[9]In my writings, 'belief' means an espoused assertion.
[10]Cf. my manuscripts "Intersensory Discorrelation" (1981) and "Personhood II" on illusions of intersensory correlation.
[11]Formalist scientism's mystique of stipulation will be a topic in Part V.
[12]Cf. presupposing "other minds" to explain my mind.
[13]An even more traditional explanation would apply my analysis to the metaphysical question "Does truth exist?"
[14]Another selection of this site.
[15]1994. In the original version, I called these self-actuation events "bootstrap events." That is vivid, but unnecessarily obscure.
[16]At the end of "Is Incredulity Self-Defeating?" I answer the taunt "Would you jump out of a tenth-story window" addressed to the skeptic.
[17]Feb. 1981
[18]Another selection of this site.
[19]Like ringing in the ears; the psychedelic experience of the air twinkling. The terminology is from earlier manuscripts of mine.
[20]As I look at the abnormal psychology textbooks, it seems that there is a continuum in such judgments, as between the normal person's, and the disturbed person's.
[21]The textbooks of abnormal psychology are not helpful for this study because of the bias of the case studies. In textbook case studies, the subjects are unable to act in the world and win real gratifications. There is an involuted helplessness which seems completely futile. That is because the case studies are selected so that insecurity never reflects a novel personal strength. Psychiatry wants all personal traits to be routine. It wants patients it can patronize, patients inferior to the world. (This remark pertains more to the misfit with a highly original, distinctive identity which has not yet matured.)