- Keyboard shortcuts:
Jump to top
RSS feed- Latest comments - Subscribe to the comment feeds of this photo
- ipernity © 2007-2024
- Help & Contact
|
Club news
|
About ipernity
|
History |
ipernity Club & Prices |
Guide of good conduct
Donate | Group guidelines | Privacy policy | Terms of use | Statutes | In memoria -
Facebook
Twitter
We can see here the explanation of the error of psychologists who define ‘my senses’ by the Other’s senses and who give to the sense organ as it is for me a relativity which belongs to its being-for-others. We can see also how this error ;becomes truth if we place it on its proper level of being after we hae determined the true order of being and of knowing. Thus the objects of my world indicate laterally an object-center-of-reference which is the Other. But this center in turn appears to me from a point-of-view-without a point-of-view which is mine, which is my body or my contingency. In short, to employ an inaccurate but common expression, ‘I know the Other through the senses.’ Just as the Other is the instrument which I utilize in the manner of the instrument which I am and which no instrument can any longer utilize, so he in the ensemble of sense organs which are revealed to my ‘sense knowledge’; that is, he is a facticity which appears to a facticity. Thus there can be in its place in the order of knowing and being, a study of Other’s sense organs as they are known through the senses by me.
Sign-in to write a comment.