Do we really exist? or are we actually just an illusion looking on itself? We may just be concepts that emerged from something physical. perception of self would be considered circular, and memories could be reconstructed , so we can never be for certain who we are or if only one individual exists in reality , which is you. If it's personality , the pattern of traits could be replicated , once technology gets good enough. and it can't just be the brain , because does that mean you removed the persons existence , by merely having an influence on his brain? on issues like this it feels like the best we can do is just assume we exist for practicality.
For practical reasons we can ignore a lot of the questions that you've posited. There's been a few discussions recently in the scientific community about a society's tendency towards creating a matrix of a universe within itself. We could be a part of this chain or its original mover, but the answers to these questions wouldn't likely resolve other problems that affect our lives.
I love reading all these philosophical threads when I'm stoned. Ito really trips you up. My friends think I'm fucking retarded when I read them out loud~
Well I like to think that we are simply a by-product of physical matter, and are just an information pattern repeating. We certainly exist as in we can experience life, but I don't think we actually have any free will of our own, just the illusion of it. We respond to the environment via stimuli and previous experiences nothing more (and those previous experiences are built off of how we responded to the environment). However I still believe we need to be held accountable for our actions, whether free will is an illusion or not, it is certainly a damn good one.
So I experience , therefore I exist? Does that mean when people sleep or are in a coma and experience nothing, would that mean they momentarily cease to exist?
By their perspective yes, ours no. The fact that we can experience life is proof that we exist, or at least our consciousness and an illusionary existence. We know something has to be happening, whether or not reality really exists as we perceive it is another matter entirely.
You exist - no question about it. You cannot imagine non-existence. So if you're reading this (or even if you're not), you exist. Period. How you exist, what you experience, what you learn from those experiences, who you think you are, etc, etc, are extremely subjective and open to change. Whether you have always existed, will always exist, in one form or another, in the same way that energy cannot be created or destroyed, is not essential to know in order to experience existence. You just do, and you are conscious that you do. But you can always become more conscious and aware of your existence, and what that means, and some would say that is the purpose of existing in the way we do. There are many who believe those who are no longer with us still exist, and indeed many communicate with them. Not everyone believe this of course, but that doesn't make it any less real for those who do. What form existence takes can and does change. Is it important to know this? Not so much, only to accept that the way you exist now is not the way you existed before, nor will it be the way you will exist in the future. The more open to that you are the more real your existence can become.
So if we break everything down to that ability to experience , how does the differentiate from me to you? Are we all the same? if yes would we be considered individuals or one being? If I get what you're saying You're perceiving that you experience And also I'd like to point out that the only they we can observe is what we perceive , and since what we perceive is usually an illusion , it's also possible the observer is also an illusion. The source of the perception and experience probably real , but is that the "I"?
We are the same, made of the same stuff, but individual in that sameness. We are one, yet separate, each a unique aspect of the whole, through which the whole, being the sum of our collective consciousness, and the originator of it, experiences.
Whether the observer is an illusion or not (I'm of the mind that its possible everything is an illusion, but it's also possible everything is not) something is causing us to perceive and experience, therefore we know that something must be real, whether its us, what we are perceiving, or just the illusion generator (whatever it may be). However, experiencing isn't a requirement of existing, its possible that rock's really do exist, but they can't experience. By the rocks perspective it wouldn't know if it existed or not, we have the luxury of knowing that we actually do exist, or at least our consciousness exists on some level. I did some further thinking on your question at the end there "The source of perception and experience is probably real, but is that the "I"?" Not sure if I'm understanding your question properly but I'll give it a go. Here you have reality, a colorless universe, full of light photons, matter, energy, everything that basically makes up the universe. Then the said universe by chance creates life. This life becomes conscious, the consciousness is a direct by-product of the real universe, however the consciousness itself is an illusion. It think's it is seeing a universe full of color, while meanwhile it is just perceiving the light photons in a way that the brain can understand. The consciousness thinks it has free will, but really is just reacting to stimuli of the real universe. The irony here is if that is the case, the real universe can never really experience itself, while the by-product, the illusionary consciousness can experience the real universe. I like where your going on your top paragraph. I think we are all just one entity to be quite honest. When we die, I doubt time has any meaning after death, and death is a complete lack of consciousness (and since you require a consciousness to perceive you will never experience death.) I bet your perspective just switches over to a newborn entity, and since time probably has no meaning, we are all just one entity living separate individual lives, probably simultaneously or in a chronological way that we cannot fathom. Well, it's a possibility anyways.
wow that sounds amazing while high.(I'm high right now). nonetheless , I dont understand it. "However, experiencing isn't a requirement of existing, its possible that rock's really do exist, but they can't experience. By the rocks perspective it wouldn't know if it existed or not, we have the luxury of knowing that we actually do exist, or at least our consciousness exists on some level." So then if experience is'nt a requirement for existing , then we can't use our experience to prove our existence right? "I did some further thinking on your question at the end there "The source of perception and experience is probably real, but is that the "I"?" Not sure if I'm understanding your question properly but I'll give it a go. Here you have reality, a colorless universe, full of light photons, matter, energy, everything that basically makes up the universe. Then the said universe by chance creates life. This life becomes conscious, the consciousness is a direct by-product of the real universe, however the consciousness itself is an illusion. It think's it is seeing a universe full of color, while meanwhile it is just perceiving the light photons in a way that the brain can understand. The consciousness thinks it has free will, but really is just reacting to stimuli of the real universe. The irony here is if that is the case, the real universe can never really experience itself, while the by-product, the illusionary consciousness can experience the real universe. I like where your going on your top paragraph. I think we are all just one entity to be quite honest. When we die, I doubt time has any meaning after death, and death is a complete lack of consciousness (and since you require a consciousness to perceive you will never experience death.) I bet your perspective just switches over to a newborn entity, and since time probably has no meaning, we are all just one entity living separate individual lives, probably simultaneously or in a chronological way that we cannot fathom. Well, it's a possibility anyways." And yea it's like the anchor chained onto the beginning or the absolute starting point of everything. But at the same time it could be from many other sources reaching in to our "reality" around us. It's like one unity , and it's like a web or dandilion , where everything is a net spread around the center , and there are countless dots around it and there are strings connected to an inner net, then those are connected to a another inner net. and it repeats un til it reaches one of unit that is the the startingpoint/source. .
that's a good question ,because I define existence is what is actually in reality. so it would need something like absolute evidence that this thing isn't fallible.
Man it's like a dot that is inside nothingness and expands infinitely while reality is made. Like a big expansion. Actually no, that would assume we are one ,which begs the question ,so there is like the net connected to an infinite array of nets , except there could be also an infinite array of independent sources.
On the part you mentioned about experience, like I said we can prove that at least the illusion of our existence is real. If we can experience, then something must be causing us to experience, and that must exist, or have something that causes it to exist. Eventually at some point something exists, no matter how you look at it because our experience can't come from nothing or we would not experience anything. However it is possible for something to not be able to experience and yet still exist. I have to admit, I don't understand your last paragraph, I should probably sober up a bit then read it again.
it's very analogous , but pretty much its like giant web of cause and effect whether our illusion of self is from one source or multiple sources is unknown.
Belief in your existance is called a properly basic belief, among others. In order for us to appreciate science, for example, we have a properly basic belief that the external reality exists and that we have awareness of it as can be discerned with the senses. It presupposes the reality of ourselves and of the reliability of our senses. It seems reasonable that we exist but i dont think it can be independently justified.