Are new discoveries in philosophical thought limitless in terms of what we can and how we can know our surroundings? I have this idea of philosophy that is in terms of application: it comes in varying degrees. For one, how I interact with the environment immediately surrounding me to the point where I question my beliefs in that regard and about everything where I come to realize that I really don’t that much about what I see? I have not studied philosophy in great depth, but I do know some basics and fundamentals thereof. And; I think I can build on that by creating another or different branch of epistemology or knowledge in general theretofore. If I’m very critical about my experiences and everything I can experience or everything that I can come to know from day to day then and somehow I learn new things or incept new ideas from these experience and probably and I am not sure but only in the Experience. But sometimes the experience or the new ideas formed by them create in me with such speed that I tend to forget what has manifested, but then these ideas might resurface again in me and again.
Can new philosophical thought take us to the stars? But some say that philosophy is just thought and that it ends here; but, I would argues the differ and say the the idea of the Logos is infinite in its Platonic realm and domain. But why? How do you know? I don’t know. I would say that this new philosophy might and should have its bearings in the scientific method. In this regard I would say that the knowledge derived from these ideas that I have in this discipline can be quantifiable. But then you would say that there is where the divided occurs. I would come back to you and say that there is a close connection between the two practices and thus this bridge must be considederd and examined with close scrutiny. For instance, I can promote innovation in anything we do, can do, and potentially will do through observation alone. And by Observation I mean to really look at things close and even go as far as intervening with the thing of Experience. Here I would have to say that we can come to know things like a child by playing with objects but having the mind of the learned that captivatates the ideas to the extent where the child is expressionless.
Thus, it is throught this kind of thinking or observation that one can grasp the essence of things for which he can come to know. For example and to the slightest degree – objects in motion. But I would say that we would have more control with the small things as opposed to the big ones because I can’t play with the big things the way I want to or manipulated to any degree the way I want to; like the way a child plays with things. But the bigger I am the bigger things I can play with. But then you would say how can we think like a child and a child is a child and its thinking is only native to a child. My argument here is that the grown person can mimic this behahavior and extrapolated the same as in the child and bring it to fruition or application and from there to method and therefrom extend the possibility of a science or a piece of knowlede where heretofore it was unknown in me.
Kokozyon True Fiction 