Skimmed through the first page but don't have time to go through the rest till later. It reminds me of plato's allegory with the cave. Also brings up a question I always ask myself. Is there a god or spiritual being so to speak that created this reality or is our consciousness permeating this reality becoming aware of its own self. Therefore we are what makes up gods existence. And I'd like to mention alan watts. My philosophies tie in very close to his, or the other way around. Probably because he lead me to think in some of they ways that I now do
The point is, "existing" and knowing of your own existence are two wholly different set of circumstances. As dreaming and knowing that you are, in fact, dreaming, are two different set of circumstances.
"For if I say, I see, or, I walk, therefore I am; and if I understand by vision or walking the act of my eyes or of my limbs, which is the work of the body, the conclusion is not absolutely certain, because, as is often the case in dreams, I may think that I see or walk, although I do not open my eyes or move from place to place, and even, perhaps, although I have no body; BUT, if I mean the sensation itself, or consciousness of seeing or walking, the knowledge is manifestly certain, because it is then referred to the mind, which alone perceives or is conscious that it sees or walks" - Descartes
Am I certain that someone isn't controlling my hands as I type or that my leg is really my leg? Am I certain that these sub vocalized voices really belong to me or are produced by me? As you've taken on the position of what is conceivable is possible. It is conceivable that we are just mere non-elaborative observers just in it for the ride. it may feel like its in control of this body , bu it actually does not , just given an illusion.
LOL !! Oh, my dear Descartes.. may you rest in peace.. how short-changed you were, when you were living, and still are, today. Descartes' seminal philosophy of the mind is literally founded on.. nvm.. just look into something called 'Cartesian doubt'. lol "Cartesian doubt is methodological. Its purpose is to use doubt as a route to certain knowledge by finding those things which could not be doubted. The fallibility of sense data in particular is a subject of Cartesian doubt. René Descartes, the originator of Cartesian doubt, automatically put all beliefs, ideas, thoughts, and matter in doubt. He showed that his grounds, or reasoning, for any knowledge could just as well be false. Sensory experience, the primary mode of knowledge, is often erroneous and therefore must be doubted. For instance, what one is seeing may very well be a hallucination. There is nothing that proves it cannot be. In short, if there is any way a belief can be disproved, then its grounds are insufficient. From this, Descartes proposed two arguments, the dream and the demon. Descartes, knowing that the context of our dreams, while possibly unbelievable, is often life-like, hypothesized that humans can only believe that they are awake. There are no sufficient grounds by which to distinguish a dream experience from a waking experience. For instance, Subject A sits at her computer, typing this article. Just as much evidence exists to indicate that her composing this article is reality as there is to demonstrate the opposite. Descartes conceded that we live in a world that can create such ideas as dreams. However, by the end of The Meditations, he concludes that we can distinguish dream from reality at least in retrospect Descartes reasoned that our very own experience may very well be controlled by an evil demon of sorts. This demon, or genius, is powerful enough to control anybody. He could have created a superficial world that we may think we live in. If I can find a phenomena that cannot be doubted, I can examine this phenomena of certain knowledge. As I am doubting, I do notice one phenomena that I cannot doubt. This is the fact that I am doubting. Since I cannot doubt, while I am doubting, that I am, in fact doubting; I must, at least exist. No matter how much doubt I have about particular things, I think, therefore, I am." Another quotable link.. http://www.princeton.edu/~grosen/puc/phi203/descrartes.html
.. for those who are, without a doubt, interested.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-aYWNsQG48 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-YaYxTzZp0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptgw7kb0YBc
Are you certain that you are the one that is doubting/ am I certain that I am the one that is doubting? if I am not a thinking thing and this line of thought is actually generated by something else and I am just a mere observer then it is conceived that we could possibly be mere observers similar to a homunculus in a Cartesian theatre except it has no influential power. Not necessarily conceived by me and that too could had been generated by something else.
Yes, that's one answer that can be derived, by a subject, from Cartesian doubt; that is, an answer which can be acknowledged and affirmed by an intuitive observer.