|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 11:46 am
"We are all aware that the senses can be deceived, the eyes fooled. But how can we be sure our senses are not being deceived at any particular time, or even all the time? Might I just be a brain in a tank somewhere, tricked all my life into believing in the events of this world by some insane computer? And does my life gain or lose meaning based on my reaction to such solipsism?" -- Project PYRRHO, Specimen 46, Vat 7; Activity Recorded M.Y. 2302.22467 -- TERMINATION OF SPECIMEN ADVISED
Okay, so I borrowed the quotation from a computer game, but Specimen 46 makes a good point. This is the principle behind the Cogito, although I believe Descartes didn't actually take that far enough. He said that the only thing any one person can be sure of the existence of is his own mind, but as nearly as I can tell, it is only the existence of a single thought - whichever one you are having right now - of which you can be sure.
HOWEVER... does it matter?
After all, whether the world is made of quarks and gluons or ones and zeroes, it shows itself to be consistent. Every time I look out of the window, I see the same scene. Every time I throw a rock into the air, it comes back down. The fact that I cannot contruct an absolutely indisputable airtight proof of this is somewhat irrelevant. For one thing, I don't actually need to prove it to anybody who isn't me, and I'm already more or less convinced that there is a world out there.
And if you disagree? Well, I can't be sure you exist anyway, so you don't count razz
Discuss...
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 6:15 pm
hehe, I always thing that way.
And sometimes out of nowhere this thought of weather or not this reality is "real"...strikes me and I spooke myself.
lol
I always think of worlds within worlds withinworlds...if that made anysence.
and I can agree that they only thing that I can be sure of is my thoughts of the moment.
Sometimes I wonder how I can prove that I exsist and that this isn't some matrix.
XP
HOw can I? I'm still thinking aobut it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2007 12:38 am
Well if nothing is real then existance is trivial, and it doesn't matter what you think because you don't.
Alternatively if things do exist and matter, then what you think does matter. So it always made more sense to me to concentrate on the nontrivial case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2007 12:40 am
That said I do think our senses and the limits of our cognitive ability put filters and limits on what and how we are able to perceive, whether their is some unifing truth underlying everything always seemed to be some of the primary concerns of religion and science.
(not sure that the impications if any of this thought are, but you did say discuss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 2:46 am
We can't say if everything is 'there'. We are 'in' it and can't get out (living ;p) so we'll have to learn to live(:p) with things the way they are.
Even our experiments would mean nothing because they could be 'generated' by that evil computer.
Well I'd say thinking, feeling etc. is a proof of being. Just being, nothing else.
Even if our perceptions are totally 'wrong' we can't deny we don't have em.
There is no true 'reality' only things that we percieve, so logically most people [(righfully) (it's not fun being a philosopher :p)] think these things are true and absolute.
Some other (stupid wink ) things to think about:
If you look at the universe from infinity there's ~ nothing.
If you look on a infinite small scalle there's ~nothing
So wth??
Or about moving/accelleration...
If you look on a infinite smal time interval, all moving object are standing still...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
