segundoCaptainZidgelI actually feel so bad for you, that you thought this in your brain and thought it changed anything, or was even valid (newsflash armchair linguist: language changes with context and time, English is not bound by millennium-old Greek suffixes, and you clearly knew what they meant by -phobic if you knew to find the suffix for hatred, so your pedantry accomplishes nothing). I hope you enter human society and form a connection with another human being one day.I'm sorry you are too stricken with ennui to truly care about the many travesties we have to bear when using the english language, such as the horrible choice of using "phobos" as a suffix. For instance, the second greatest philosopher ever, Charles Sanders Peirce, felt the same way about more conventional words like "philosophy" and "phenomenology", opting for "cenoscopy" and "phaneroscopy".
The term “phaneron” is one Peirce took from the Greek φανερός, meaning what is “visible” or “manifest”. The choice of this word seems calculated in a certain way to distinguish it from the “phenomenon”, or the “thing appearing to view”; that is, while the term “phenomenon” is limited to the object in question (and thus its import specified by whether one presumes realism or idealism), the manifestness of the phaneron embraces a wider range of possible meaning: for in what is manifest—and this interpretation is strengthened by texts of Peirce soon to follow—in what is manifest we have more than merely what comes upon us from without, but include also the provenations following from the activity of our own minds.
To quote Peirce:C. S. Peirce, Letters to William JamesThe phaneron, as I now call it, the sum total all of the contents of human consciousness, which I believe is about what you (borrowing the term of [the radical positivist, Richard] Avenarius) call pure experience,– but I do not admit the point of view of Avenarius to be correct or to be consonant to any pragmatism, nor to yours, in particular, and therefore I do not like that phrase. For me experience is what life has forced upon us,–a vague idea no doubt. But my phaneron is not limited to what is forced upon us; it also embraces all that we most capriciously conjure up, not objects only but all modes of contents of cognitional consciousness.
You can accuse me of appealing to semantics, but saying exactly what we mean is quite important.
knsumethis is unironically the single most stupid fucking thing i have ever read on this site lmaoSorry, but you are sorely mistaken. Nothing that spirates from my mind can be vis a vis "stupid" as since I have been tested on the WAIS scale for an intelligence quotient of over 150. What about you, friend?
paging TheScientificGamer and TheGamingMetaphysician to backup these claims...