Pretty much. I have had some eerie realizations while playing video games. What is your environment? The people... the animals... the plants... it's all the same one thing. It is all about how you interact with it... it determines how it interacts with you.
It's not that out there. It's a well known philosophy, actually. Yes. But you are apart of my reality, and exist solely through me. (See how this might not work?) Maybe... it's not all you and me... maybe we all exist through each other.
Really? Share a philosophy with more intelligence. Ego much? Your ideas are just as stupid. Yes, they are.
Why are you posting in the S&P? If it's to suggest that shared philosophies are "very dumb" then gtfo. Sorry to semi-hijack thread, op.
Because the topic intrigued me, so I clicked on the thread, read the topic, and posted. Pretty simple explanation. Any more retarded questions that I can answer?
Good enough. But I have my own imagination and you're just a part of mine like an NPC also. Possible? Sure.
thats cute...but if you died today we would all still be here, so if you really believe what youre saying you're obviously wrong.
Man, first and foremost, in order for a synpase to fire it has to respond to some sort of external stimuli. Your perception is entirely useless unless you have external stimuli to react to. Therefore, we can't make any positive claims about the external stimuli that affects us everytime we listen, open our eyes, touch something. So while we might not know what that external stimuli IS, we at least know that there is something external to us, whether or not we can fully understand/interact with it, that's really not the subject of the debate. Calling the OP's original topic a "philosophy" is really just kind of changing the definiton of the word and using it to encompass any self-proclaimed truth or way of thinking. The OP's randomly inspired musings are as much Philosophy as Scientology. And I think both are stupid. Yeah, I said it. You can do the whole "That's subjective." routine, that most pseudo-intellectuals/coffee-shop philosophers like to take, but to boldly and sure-firedly say "You are all a figment of my imagination, prove me wrong." You're really doing 2 things wrong. 1) Your argument(which if we're following Western philosophy, then traditionally your argument should be consistant of some form of Sentential Logic that consists of premises and a conclusion.) You present a conclusion, with no premises, and put the burden of proof on those who disagree with you. In one fail swoop, we've identified that your argument is both invalid(The truth of your premises don't guarantee the truth of your conclusion) and unsound, your premises aren't true under all conditions(There are foreseeable counter-examples.) etc.etc. So instead, I'll do what David Hume did to John Locke, and I'll say "Prove to me, that I am a figment of your imagination." Shifting the burdon of proof is always fun, isn't it? Don't be too quick to think you're cooler than you actually are. Theres a few billion people on this planet. They are not all your figments. They are living, fucking, eating, playing, talking- creatures. They do it while you're asleep, while you're at work, and while you're sitting on grasscity, pretending that your thoughts are meaningful and worthy of attention. But, then again, I could be wrong, and I could just be a figment of your imagination trying to convince myself that I am not a figment of my/your imagination. Or am I?