I have come upon this idea, and when I try to explain it to any one else, it is always tossed aside as though it holds no real significance. And in several instances, people seem to be angered by the idea that I state the possibility of them being non-existent. So, I wanted to see how all of you City folks respond. My little idea is this: It is easier to believe you do not exist than it is to believe that you do. Here is, in its least complex form, my logic for this statement. 1. To state your non existence, only this statement is needed: "You do not exist." 2. To state your existence, proof is needed. 3. Proof of existence is impossible. 4. With no absolute proof of your "existence" AND none of your "non existence", the argument is reduced to purely faith 5. Thereby, it is easier to believe that you do not exist than it is to believe you do exist. So, any takers??? PS. by "faith", I mean that in its original definition...a belief in the trustworthiness of an idea that is not yet proven. Not "faith" in the religious meaning.
Why do you assume that you don't have to prove non-existence? Existence is all relative on the perspective. People and experiences exist in my perspective. When you start talking about a perspective that can't even be understood then yes it is faith based. I don't think it is a sound argument.
Prove it. Prove it. You cannot prove either. Nor can you prove that you exist. I say...I am writing solely to myself. You don't exist. Therefore, it is easier to believe that you do not exist than it is to believe you do. <<< look at that statement only at face value. Don't go quite so deep at first. Then respond with whatever you feel like. And....Why must I assume non existence takes no proof??? Because I am not making the claim of non existence, you are. And your claim is, quite simply, impossible to prove as fact. It is also very easy for me to disregard your claim of existence. All it takes is "no". You cannot prove me otherwise, much as I cannot prove it to be so. So therefore, it is easier to believe you do not exist than it is to believe that you do. However, I truly thank you for responding, unlike scooby. Or did I respond....or, did no one respond.....
i see where your coming from, but read what i have to say. if i bleed i leave my mark on the ground or wherever i may be standin or sitting, if i smoke a bowl then the smell carries to where i happen to be, if i drive then im laying the foundation for someone to follow my exact footsteps. so it's actually quite simple and feesable to prove my existence just takes a simple thought process. however your theory is very interesting, try talking to a professor about it
i realized that. if my post count ever exceeds my little rep point system thing count, i might back off.
it is WAY easier to realize that yes, you do. you might not be able to prove it, but i bet if i kicked you in the nuts you'd go down hard.
I think therefore I am. In order to think regarding my state of existance, I must be existing. Existance is a prerequisite of thought.
You complain that people simply dismiss your argument, yet you then just dismiss others' claims of existence. If existence must be proven, so must non-existence. You cannot be sure that other people exist, but neither can you be sure that they don't.
The fact that we do exists does not have to be proven simply because we do exists. Otherwise none of anything we experience would be possible. The idea of non existence is a foolish idea in my opinion simply because each of us as humans are alive and we die. The passage of time ensuring death is the cold hard proof that we do indeed exist. Denying that is denying your humanity and existence which makes your method of thinking and reasoning illogical. How can you not exist yet have thought process that is unique to you alone, such as we all have? If we didn't exist there would be nothingness for us. There would be no us, no physical realm which we would inhabit. Perhaps it would still be here, but we wouldn't exist to know that. You're claim that it is easier to believe that you do not exist than to believe you do is simple illogical. Disbelieving in existence is only easy, because accepting our existence opens up a lifetime of questions and experiences good or ill.
I happen to sort of agree with you, but I think it's important to stress that this only applies to me, not to you. That is, this proof only proves the prover's existence. I can only be sure that I exist, all the rest of you could just be illusions.
That's true, but that is being a bit naive isn't it? I mean, what purpose of your own existence without that of others? It could be said we all live in our own dimension and that everything around us is only what we make of it. and that only we as in me, or you are the only sentient being in existence. I cannot debate that with you as there is no solid way to debate that.
Right, there's no deductive way to get out of this skeptical hole. But really, I do believe that other people exist. The difference between "other people are figments of my imagination" and "other people actually exist" is not perceptible to me. I mean, maybe you really exist, maybe you don't, either way everything appears exactly the same to me. Since it doesn't make any difference at all, I just believe whatever's more convenient. Since it would be hard for me to function socially if I thought everyone else was imaginary, I believe everyone really exists.
Prove that you can prove logic works, and then prove this. Or prove that time works in reverse, is real, and you can do this: prove this statement, and then prove that you can prove something. What's proof got to do with it?
Haha, nice one bkadoctaj. I don't like the notion of "I think, therefore I am." A more accurate description would be "I think, therefore I think." Thinking only proves the possibility of an illusion of "thinking." Perhaps everything and everyone is purely based on an illusion. Or, perhaps not. I must admit that I did not originally define existence. In the sense that this is posted in, I am assuming "existence" to be existence as a human on this world. Kicking me in the nuts only proves that I ,at very least, experienced the perception of being kicked in the nuts. Perhaps I truly was, but that is impossible to prove. So by this logic, I find it feasible to say that...you guessed it: It is easier to believe you don't exist than believe you do. Read on. I cannot prove you do exist, nor can I prove you do not. BUT, I can "prove" to myself (as much as is ever possible to prove) that I have, at a minimum, the perception of existence. Answer this: does the perception of another person prove their existence? My response would be; no, it simply proves my perception of their existence. Of course, this is truly impossible to ever resolve. It is very much like trying to prove a god's existence. As an afterthought....I would say it is easier to believe in god than it is to not believe in god. Think of it this way....which is a more elementary vision of how we exist, and easier to imagine as being true. 1) Everything began from nothing. The universe is constantly expanding, and is at least 150 billion light years across. Chemistry begat biology, and basic inanimate substances grouped together and began to self replicate. Organisms as advanced as humans are really just bundles of water, carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous and some other shit. But, if you point a gun at one of these meat bags, it will feel emotions, might talk, and might run away from danger. There is nothing, or something, outside of this self made universe, that evolved from nothing. Or, 2) Some other entity made it all, and that is why you are alive. That is why religion started...because it is easy to believe. And that is why religion continues today. It answers unbelievably difficult questions. So, think about how the religion argument relates to the thread..... EDIT: "You think, therefore you are"......is that logical or not. In my opinion, that statement is hugely off. This is because, you can never prove that you think. Only "you" can prove that "you" think, and you may only prove this to yourself. You could never prove to me that you do actually think, much as I could never prove to you that I think. And, because I am me, I can never know that you think. So, I can never know that you "are". However, I do not truly believe that you all don't exist. I only believe that it is easy to believe you don't exist. Thats all.....oh, and sign the petition below.
Disbelieving in existence is only easy....exactly, it is easy. I never stated that I believed it to be true....I only said it is easy. Just like religion. Just because religion is not provable, is it not worth examining? Look at the Copenhagen Interpretation....a big floppy dick might pop out of your head right...NOW. Or maybe not. Is it worth considering the possibility. I say, yes...though I wouldn't lose sleep over it. http://www.cracked.com/blog/2008/08/07/5-scientific-theories-head-explode/ I remain true to my original claim. It is EASIER to believe you do not exist than it is to believe that you do.
Where do you exist though. On earth....as a human...is thought from your brain, or from your body. Is your body "you"? Or is your brain "you"? And finally, why is existence a prerequisite of thought? Does a tree think? It moves towards light, now doesn't it. It grows vertically. Is instinct thought? Does a computer think? Try this on for size... Pretend this is a fact: I think therefore I am. This is true then as well, right? : You think therefore you are. Prove to "me" that "you" think.......impossible. So, now it is: Maybe you think, so maybe you are. Which begs: Maybe you don't think, so maybe you aren't. Which then gives the POSSIBILITY of: You don't think, therefore you aren't. Deny that^^^^ And, while you are at it, deny that I am the Virgin Mary. Here's some more. You must exist to think, right? Must you think to exist? If a person truly believes they do not exist, do they? Is existence found only in thought? Does a rock exist to itself? Or does it only exist to us? Can you ever be absolute in saying a rock has no soul, no sense of existence? Until you become a rock, that is impossible. And, when you die, do you no longer exist, simply because you no longer think? Do you exist upon yourself, or upon others as well in death? Is all life carbon based, or not?