Idealism doesn't necessarily have to be true, it does prove the possibility for it to be true. The fact is, whether reality truly exists, or whether or not its all a dream, is yet to be determined. So i myself bet that reality exists, as well as god. If im wrong, hey we all gotta die sometime.
And, yet, who or what is it that is contemplating either side of the coin? Your tangible body, or your intangible mind?
Both? Me being unable to know if something like, if the long ass shower i took was long, or hot...because in reality i can't know for sure anything, i had already admitted that. The realization that the possibility exists for existance to not exist, is what hit me. I couldn't focus on anything but that, my mind scrambling to solidify my own existance...i lost the point of life for a second. I had a trump card though, God. You see i believe, or i should say know, God exists. God is simply a dog with 6 legs, or maybe just a thought. However, i have resigned myself into believing that if God doesn't exist, neither does existance. It was realizing that god not existing could be true, that brought me back into the land of fairy tales and rainbows. So god must exist, because I exist. If god does not then neither do i. The best part is that neither of these two statements can be proved or known to anyone but myself.
"because in reality i can't know for sure anything" -- But, you know certainly that you know nothing for certain, right? Or are you not sure about that as well? I mean to say, are you sure that you aren't sure? "The best part is that neither of these two statements can be proved or known to anyone but myself."
I know that i can't know everything, including being able to know that i know nothing. I could know nothing, I could also know everything. After all if this is a false reality created by my mind, it would be impossible for my mind not to know what it was producing. That is of course only if this is a false reality.
Of course something can exist unperceived. Do you mean unperceived to every single mind that has ever existed? Sent
1.) So, you do know something. 2.) Following every single possible pathway without any sense of grounding is quite dangerous... and yet, I ask, who is it that chooses between and follows possibilities of thought? 3.) Corporeal existence being ultimate reality is false... 4.) If you doubt the validity of reality, can you, thereupon, doubt your own doubt pertinent to the validity of reality?
How can something exist unperceived? And, please, tell me about the attributes and characteristics of this thing that exists unperceived...
[quote name="Boats And Hoes" post="19399838" timestamp="1390599130"]How can something exist unperceived? And, please, tell me about the attributes and characteristics of this thing that exists unperceived...[/quote]I can't really answer that until you answer my question Sent
"Do you mean unperceived to every single mind that has ever existed?" -- I just mean, quite plainly, unperceived, i.e., not perceived.
[quote name="Boats And Hoes" post="19399893" timestamp="1390599602"]"Do you mean unperceived to every single mind that has ever existed?" -- I just mean, quite plainly, unperceived, i.e., not perceived.[/quote]Yes, but by anyone? Sent
What do you mean? How can there be perception without a perceiver? So, again, can you imagine an existent thing that is not perceived?
I know only of possibilities. Me, myself, and i, at the same time of course I thought it was yet to be determined? Of course, being able to doubt your own doubt, is what moves some people forward. There may be a chance that i dont exist, however there is also a chance that i do, and even then that there is also a chance that something else maybe true. Such as, the chance that as of right now, i am going through this thing called life, and i may be in the process of being created by myself.
[quote name="Boats And Hoes" post="19399999" timestamp="1390600661"]What do you mean? How can there be perception without a perceiver?So, again, can you imagine an existent thing that is not perceived?[/quote]Back in the day when humans hadn't colonised certain countries, certain plants and animals wouldn't have ever been perceived, but they were there, they did exist. That is existence without perception. And asking someone to describe something that hasn't been perceived is a contradiction because you're then forcing someone to perceive it, regardless of weather it exists or not. But before they perceived it, it would have still existed (if it exists)Sent
You see, this sort of philosophizing is what gives philosophy a bad name, and makes it target for ridicule. Can you not exist and contemplate the possibility of not existing? I mean, really... "and i may be in the process of being created by myself." -- Yes, the self is like an un-carved block that we must continually work on and emend; and yet, if I didn't exist can I work on carving/creating my-self? "certain plants and animals wouldn't have ever been perceived" -- Tell me about these plants and animals... what did they look like? What sort of attributes did they posses? "And asking someone to describe something that hasn't been perceived is a contradiction because you're then forcing someone to perceive it, regardless of weather it exists or not." -- Precisely; and the things we take to exist without, and regardless of, perception are things we cognize in our MINDS. "But before they perceived it, it would have still existed (if it exists)" -- We say something exists... now, please, define for me the 'existence' of something without descriptions rooted in and in reference to sense-perception?
[quote name="Boats And Hoes" post="19400072" timestamp="1390601495"]You see, this sort of philosophizing is what gives philosophy a bad name, and a target for ridicule. Can you not exist and contemplate the possibility of not existing? I mean, really..."and i may be in the process of being created by myself." -- Yes, the self is like an un-carved block that we must continually work on and emend; and yet, if I didn't exist can I work on carving/creating my-self?"certain plants and animals wouldn't have ever been perceived" -- Tell me about these plants and animals... what did they look like? What sort of attributes did they posses?"And asking someone to describe something that hasn't been perceived is a contradiction because you're then forcing someone to perceive it, regardless of weather it exists or not." -- Precisely; and the things we take to exist without and regardless perception are things we cognize in our MINDS."But before they perceived it, it would have still existed (if it exists)" -- We say something exists... now, please, define to for me the 'existence' of something without descriptions rooted in and in reference to sense-perception?[/quote]Well everyone might have a different definition of "existence" but I think that if you trot out of Africa and see a tree that no one has ever seen before, and most likely has ever perceived, like this one Then you can be pretty sure it didn't just pop out the ground and begin existing the moment you saw it (and thus, perceived it) it was probably there, existing, before anyone perceived itSent
What are you talking about? AI doesn't dynamically think about existence - it's a machine governed by immutable necessity, i.e., a machine cannot think period. Where did you hear about such a thing?
Why are you assuming that I said things pop into existence out of nowhere? And, please, again, I ask, define for me what a "THING" is without reference to sense-perception? If you can... then I will concede that this whole thread has been an utter and complete fallacy. I'd rather you address the latter question, as opposed to the former.