How do I prove that what I sense exists? If what I sense is only representations then are my thoughts only representations?
I think therefore I am.
>>16539870
So if I die the world and everyone in it won't suffer?
>>16539870
Wrong. You have a sense that you are, therefore you can think.
>>16539880
That's not what it means at all.
It means that since you can think, there must exist some physical thing to be doing the thinking.
>>16539856
You can't prove your reality exists. You might be a brain in a jar hooked up to a super computer. But that shouldn't change anything.
you can't. for all we know we could be in the Matrix or everything could be a dream. All you can know is that you, yourself, exist in some form, because you can think and those thoughts must come from somewhere. Everything ,else in the universe might not be real, you have know way of knowing, although it probably is.
>>16539893
the fact that I am able to think proves that there is a consciousness
Honestly this is a pointless question. It's definitely an interesting question, but if you think about it no matter what answer you come up with doesn't change the fact that you are perceiving your world. Whether it is "real or fake" doesn't even come into play.
I just say: our existence is defined as our perception of what is around us and our ability to probe it. This then includes not only the things that you can hear, see, smell, taste, or feel, but also the things that you can probe experimentally but not perceive directly (like the shapes of molecules and the composition of matter being atomic).
>>16539903
If the girl I like isn't real should I try to do her or just lay motionless in bed forever?
>>16539942
but what about Plato's cave, if there is a higher level of existence then I'd rather experience than be contented with what we have now
>>16539933
No it does not. Do you even know what a prove is?
In order for a human being to think he must have a sense of his existence. How else would you be able to define anything in the outside world without there being any contrast to it? That contrast is the self. That is what Descartes was aiming at when he said that misunderstood meme quote but he got it backwards.
"are my thoughts only representations"
Maybe. you know that they exist in some way but its hard to tell how. Also you don't know what your own intelligence is. I think it is unclear whether you actually think or just observe your thoughts, but it seems to me that your judgement of them has an affect on them. Then again, that judgement is just another thought.
>>16539963
What if all definitions are spontaneous thoughts?
>>16539963
your right. If anyone know how conciousness could be possible. I feel like I am conscous, but the brain is just a bunch of neurons firing. It doesent seem possible uless you believe in a soul, which is bullshit. Anyone know how this could work?
>>16539958
Well there is only one problem with that. If you can't guarantee the higher existence, then it may as well not exist to you, which was the end result of Plato's Cave (according to the people still in the cave). If you ever reach some kind of higher state of nirvana, enlightenment, holiness, whatever then that is awesome, but right now you are right here and right now, and there is not much you can do but to contemplate a higher existence which you do not know to be true.
>>16540005
We can be sure of absolutely nothing but our own existence. Thats the bottom line of it
That being said that perscribes to the way of thinking that "I am the most important figure in my own personal universe no matter what", and I've always thought our brains could have invented that notion through our hubris
>>16539987
Thoughts must arise from something. For there to be thought, there must be a contrast, there must be a duality. The sense of "I am" is the basis for all thought.
>>16539963
Except Descartes overlooked that characteristics (and by extension contrasts) don't make the being. They're subjective.
>>16540071
Just because you revert back to 'I am' doesn't mean that should be an axiom
>>16540078
Are you a superject, anon?
>>16540078
His quote is useless though because he got it backwards. With his logic you could place anything instead of the "I think" part.
"I make toast. therefore I am"
>>16539856
why does it matter?
>>16540087
Thats why I made my own argument in >>16539963
>>16540095
if its backwards then the right way would be "i am, therefore I think" This would mean that anything exists could think - a rock is, therefore it thinks.
>>16540103
Because the belief that e all is one leads me to connect everything which makes for some pretty disturbing thought forms
>>16540093
I suppose. Who wouldn't be?
>>16540127
Whats disturbing about that? A collective consciousness is the only thing that seems to have significance.
>>16540110
Right, which is why I altered the quote further >>16539893
>You have a sense that you are, therefore you can think.
When i come to think of it this isn't perfectly accurate either. A proper statement would be:
>In order to think you must have a sense of self
>>16539856
I don't know, does this help?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism
Nothing is new under the sun, including both yours and mines convoluted thoughts.
Yes, they are representations of reality, lol.
Escapism comes in many forms like drugs, adrenaline junkies, ect...
Over thinking things in life is a form of escapism. It's true that there are many esoteric and exoteric things, but you should only be conscious of that when looking at man made media.
As long as you're looking/hear/feeling/smelling/tasting at things like trees, animals, and other humans in flesh you don't even have to think about whether they are real or not. You do have to judge the validity of a person's actions and words though.
Once again, you should present those kind of questions if you are looking a media, be it fictitious or purportedly documentation.
>>16540261
Check out those inverted nipples and moose knuckle on that 30,000 year old harlot.
>>16540156
Having a sense of who you are and being able to think don't prove you exist. Sure its enough to be comfortable with, but it's limited.
You may be an illusion. A memory, dream, etc. Your thoughts, your existence, may belong to a being that is not your own.
For example:
When you dream, and there are other beings in your dream, are their thoughts their own? Your subconscious created that universe. Do those entities exist? I bet they believe they exist. Just like Descartes.
>>16540261
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_projection_fallacy
I don't seem to be escaping, rather I seem to be discovering, particularly that everything is media(intended)
