Disassociation of thoughts?
From google disassociation is defined as:
"Disconnection and lack of continuity between thoughts, memories, surroundings, actions, and identity."
Now keeping this more general definition in mind and steering clear of psychiatry disorders, isn't it fair to say our thoughts can't have perfect continuity, and our ability of connecting similar things in a meaningful way is relative? Or can disassociation be a measure of creativity or an extention to logic that other people simply don't understand, but can still be purposeful?
I think of one of my favorite bits from Futurama and think our ability to connect two things can always be closer, but usually we can't measure how close they are as something else seems to always be conceivable.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q-RUHhCzgxI
"Disconnection and lack of continuity between thoughts, memories, surroundings, actions, and identity."
Now keeping this more general definition in mind and steering clear of psychiatry disorders, isn't it fair to say our thoughts can't have perfect continuity, and our ability of connecting similar things in a meaningful way is relative? Or can disassociation be a measure of creativity or an extention to logic that other people simply don't understand, but can still be purposeful?
I think of one of my favorite bits from Futurama and think our ability to connect two things can always be closer, but usually we can't measure how close they are as something else seems to always be conceivable.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q-RUHhCzgxI
Comments (18)
Definition: A leap in logic, by which a necessary part of an equation is omitted.
I've always had difficulty in distinguishing
1. Isn't true
From
2. I haven't yet found the/a proof
Vide argumentum ad ignorantiam & the divine fallacy (I feel they're relevant somehow).
Quoting TiredThinker
The experience of disassociation is another name for confusion and unintelligibility. This is only creative if it motivates us to find ways of relating what is incoherent.
You willl never find a proof for the pattens of relationship that matter most in our lives, since they are designed not to replicate static facts , but as channels for anticipating and organizing dynamically changing aspects of the world.
Maybe disassociation was a poor word since it is psychiatric. Just in general there will always be a closer association between any two things or concepts so it is relative?
I can imagine realms of insanity, where impoverished continuity may result in dysfunctional or non-functional behavior, as in the case of some psychotics. The mind demands continuity between events so as not to writhe into craze.
Some times continuity is relative other times it is mutual. When giving out commands, the communication must be shared, the continuity mutual, or else the event can not happen as desired.
Please get me a cup of water, any rational adult knowing English can understand and form a method for putting their thoughts into motion. The command has a continuity to it. Please leaf the willow tree into sausage, is obviously a discontinuity, that and nonsense. Both examples give one the distinction.
Here is an article https://theologiansinc.wordpress.com/2013/10/27/chesterton-hume-contingency-and-causality/ I would suggest reading more on Hume to get a better understanding of the philosophy of continuity. One could also think in comparative terms of chaos theory and methodological science, though I know of no formulated comparison.
Gracias for the warning but as they say "never say never ... "
Thanks. I will read more hume. Chaos theory more physics or is there a philosophy version I should look for?
Isn't that the gist of the OP, mon ami?
Sharp!!
You jest of course!
Non. C'est vrai.
[quote=Pierre-Simon Laplace]Il est facile de voir que [...][/quote]
Voir quoi?
Are you both French? I think I've seen Agent Smith speak it often enough.
No, I'm not French, but I wish I was :chin: ; just watched too much Hercule Poirot, that's all.