Oh I need even more basic summaries for David Hartley. I think this is approachable for me: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hartley/ “The FRS would know that this orphaned son of a Yorkshire clergyman was now a successful physician, thanks in part to powerful patrons (including the Cornwallis family, and the Duke of Newcastle, who was in effect prime minister), had come into personal wealth, thanks to his second marriage, and that he had devoted himself to various philanthropic projects, including the publication of the shorthand system devised by his friend, John Byrom. If the FRS knew Hartley as a friend, he would know him to be a mathematician with a special interest in statistics, an amateur violinist, and a vegetarian who saw animals as bearing a “near relation” to humans. He would know him as a husband and father (unlike Descartes, Locke, Hume, and Kant). He would know that Hartley was often in extreme pain, and in danger of losing his life, as he still suffered grievously from bladder stones. And he would know him to be a man with deeply unconventional religious beliefs.”

Oh I need even
[read full article]
 

As I am a terrible interpreter of source materials, I like looking at multiple modern summaries when I can find them. Well, there aren’t really any complete summaries of David Hartley’s work, except for one. So, I’ll start here, see how it goes and work back from there. If this author has made the connections I expect to find in David Hartley to today, then there’s no need for me to reinvent the wheel is there? https://www.amazon.com/David-Hartley-Nature-Philosophy-Psychology/dp/0791442349

As I am a
[read full article]
 

Now on David Hartley, a philosopher I never heard of before and yet who certainly influenced me by those he influenced because with everything I see so far I’m saying “Well of course, of course, yes that’s correct”, even though he wrote them hundreds of years before I came along. How’d I never heard of him? I don’t know. I’ll have to read his big work and see if this holds. If so, then I’d been accidentally reconstructing this David Hartley’s philosophy all this time and didn’t even know it.

Now on David Hartley,
[read full article]
 

Doctrine of Associations The course of reminiscence and of the thoughts generally, when not immediately dependent upon external sensation, is accounted for by the idea that there are always vibrations in the brain on account of its heat and the pulsation of its arteries. The nature of these vibrations is determined by each man’s past experience, and by the circumstances of the moment, which causes one or another tendency to prevail over the rest. Sensations which are often associated together become each associated with the ideas corresponding to the others; and the ideas corresponding to the associated sensations become associated together, sometimes so intimately that they form what appears to be a new simple idea, not without careful analysis resolvable into its component parts. David Hartley 1705-1757, considered the founder of the Associationist School of psychology

Doctrine of Associations
The
[read full article]
 

did i find my philosopher chain? i’ve come across Thomas Reid and the Scottish Common Sense before. But there was a missing association: the Associationist School of David Hartley. David Hartley leads to William James. William James to Henri Bergson, John Dewey, and Antonio Damasio. There are others i recognize but these folks jumped off the page when i saw their names under “Influenced” as philosophers I find extra special in that i understand them as “obviously true” which means my thinking is similar to – and was undoubtedly shaped by those they shaped who shaped me.

did i find my … [read full article]

 

been working on a hard physicalist view of this. if everything is physical, the connections between concepts may be an echo of a basic life process. what allows different things to link? interfaces. what happens at an interface? a mixing. acceptance. rejection. (security). like a vestibule. over the last week I’ve been looking and right down to nuclear pore there’s these beautiful one way and two way interfaces across membranes sharing smaller parts. what’s metaphors and analogies? synonyms? what affords concepts to have any relations at all to be in an ontology? i think the process is a scaled up echo of millions of tiny biological processes, not as a direct 1:1 or 1:many but rather the process.

been working on a … [read full article]