>cogito ergo sum
>>7597838
well why not why do you disagree with it
im a femenest femanon here what seems 2 be the problem if its not 2 problematic 2 ask?
>>7597838
what the fuck is thinking, and how does thinking, a purely abstract process, allow you to conclude youre being is a concrete entity.
descarte, socrates wasnt fucking around when he said human wisdom is inherently worthless. you cant even know you exist. you can only know you know nothing at all!
>>7597902
>I know that I know nothing
>>7597902
>not knowing you exist
>2016, January 18th, 25 minutes and 21 seconds past midnight
nigga thats the only thing you can know
unless we're debating the very nature of existence
in which case fuck you
>>7597917
the only thing you can know is that there is thinking. You cannot verify an ego. this is elementary shit senpai
>>7597921
Was Nietzsche the first to make this criticism?
>>7597921
I'm not necessarily saying anything about an ego
I'm just defending the fact that the only thing we know exists for sure is our own thinking process
against the replied against asshole, who seems to think that a body and a consciousness/thinking process are inextricably linked
>>7597928
that said the rest of descartes theories fall apart
like god exists because we, imperfect beings, can imagine a perfect one, and therefore a perfect one must exist?
fuck that, no one can fully understand the concept of perfection
>>7597932
Pretty sure Plato invented that one.
>>7597928
this kind of shit is about as cool as arguing if u can prove god exists which is to say once you're over 18 you should just stop it cuz it's dumb not deep
If you didn't exist, you couldn't be thinking about whether or not you exist. Matter of fact, considering no one knows what a state of nothingness even is, how can you begin to make assumptions about whether or not you exist?
This is so fucking stupid to me. What the fuck are these philosophers smoking?
>>7597939
>you couldn't be thinking
>you
>>7597936
Descartes basically used Plato ideas yeah he thought he'd proved the existence of God
>>7597928
>arguing for immaterial souls eliciting consciousness
i bet youd love that wouldnt you senpai. eternal bliss awaiting you at the end.
>>7597945
My point is that your criticism is a bit weaker when you take Platonism into account.
>>7597927
I believe Kant alluded to it, but not in the clear way Nietzsche did.
>>7597950
how so
cards on the table, I disagree with a lot of Plato
>>7597939
i know right? and faggoty fedoras bitch that post-structuralism is too wacky and meaningless, fuck no, there is way more value in foucault or derrida than there is in some 1600s edgelord who can't decide if he exists or not
>>7597955
>no one can fully understand the concept of perfection
That's accounted for in Platonism.
>>7597955
>I disagree with a lot of Plato
u mean a guy who lived 2500 years ago didn't get everything right? damn you philosophy guys are such edgy thinkers!
>>7597902
>you can only know you know nothing at all
Dwell upon that m8 :^)
>>7597963
i either didn't read that, understand it, or I forgot it
can you lay it out in simple terms or should I google it
Nonexistence is one state of nothingness. Nothingness has no shape or form, yet it is a singular concept that does not change.
In life, one can experience several different states of perception through hallucinogens. Therefore, one can conclude that they exist through the fact that their state of perception changes.
>>7597975
everything you just said is nonsense and I think bringing up drugs explains why you fucking dumbass
>>7597972
We cannot find a single instance of perfection on our physical plane of existence, but we refer to it mentally and negatively by negation. For example, one who is presented with two nearly perfect circles, one that is slightly too long and one that is slightly too wide, can tell that they're both "imperfect."
>>7597975
You don't really have to think to be aware of your own existence, at least if we see it from the Eastern philosophy point of view. According to it, we can only be "in touch" with our existence when we are completely "present in the moment".
And according to it, thinking is generally related to the ego. Animals exist; however, they do not have an ego. All the actions that an animal does are purely based on instict.
Although I assume that becoming aware of the existence of your ego reassures your own existence.
>>7598000
>when you are 12 then when you are 80 is telling.
Honestly this just makes anti descartes arguments look even weaker to me, as though they're attacking a misconception.
>>7597992
The fact that we can see physical objects aren't perfect does not immediately and necessarily imply that we, as humans, can conceive of perfection. It just means we can see that the object isn't right for the task at hand. Perfection is more complicated than that. How does a perfect object interact with others? How does it smell? Would it burn?
The thing I have with Plato is the Ideal thing. He talked about how every physically thing is basically a pale imitation of a perfect, abstract version of it that exists in our heads (this by the way is a meme, as in the old-school, pre-internet definition) so that while there are many chairs in the world, we each have in our mind the Ideal Chair, the Perfect Chair.
But if I ask you to picture a chair, it isn't a floaty angel God chair; it's one at home, or work, or one you had as a kid. For me it's those blue plastic pieces of shit from grade school. I'm not arguing that there is some realm of abstract concepts for real world objects, but I think the relationship is either matter over mind, or much complicated than Plato thought.
For instance, for awhile, there were no chairs. None. People sat on rocks. No one had an ideal in their head, or even an imperfect version. Then someone thought up a chair. You can argue that the perfect ideal came to him, but why so long after our existence? Did the cavemen think of rocks as chairs, or did they just think of the action of sitting on them?
>>7597921
Plot twist: you actually need concepts for a bunch of stuff before you can recognize thought as such. Like a concept of self as separate from other.
>>7598007
No I'm not using it like that I meant it in favor of ego more or less.
Perfection is a man-made concept, just like infinity. God can exist without being perfect, in fact the old and new testaments lead credence to this.
where'd drake go
>>7597987
This guy is correct
>>7598017
>infinity is a man made concept
Incorrect seeing it's such a natural mathematical concept of the universe. There's no way it's simply 'man made'
>>7598012
can't you homos take this fedoralosophy bullshit to /hist/ or reddit or something, this shit is fucking gay
>>7598012
A chair partakes in many forms tbqh, I don't think he thought their was a form of chair. I think forms are the elementary perfections that make up the world.
>>7598029
>natural mathematical concept
mathematics is man made you fucking moron, are philosophy phags really this dumb?
>>7598031
>when u from reddit and u came to 4chan for the memes but there's discussion
>>7598029
All concepts are man-made. The phenomena which concepts refer to may or may not be man-made
>>7597902
> how does thinking, a purely abstract process, allow you to conclude youre being is a concrete entity.
mein freund
>>7597917
> unless we're debating the very nature of existence
We are.
> in which case fuck you
Thank you, but no.
>>7598012
Plato fails the law of parsimony so hard. He just bullshitted his whole life, the ideal was a complete ass-pull
>>7598012
>For instance, for awhile, there were no chairs. None. People sat on rocks. No one had an ideal in their head, or even an imperfect version. Then someone thought up a chair. You can argue that the perfect ideal came to him, but why so long after our existence? Did the cavemen think of rocks as chairs, or did they just think of the action of sitting on them?
He would just say that this world is deprived of certain forms.
>>7597838
why did this picture get deleted? it was just a cute girl
>>7598048
serious question: why are u wasting ur life on shit this gay?
>>7598037
the functional language of maths, yes conceptual. what the language is describing could not possibly be any more real, and is, given the philosophical climate of tt, more real than I.
>>7598052
You can't have a concept outside of a mind, retard.
>falling for "atoms and electrons in my mind interact with each other so I consider it as ""thinking"" therefore ""existence""" meme
>>7598048
>deprived of certain forms
Are their aliens getting these forms? Are they for future us?
Consider how everything invented is geared toward us. Us specifically. Did the perfect realm thing exist before us? Come into being before us?
Can anything made for human beings, imperfect, be perfect?
If we all die, what happens to the ideals?
>>7598063
Anon didn't say that; anon said that mathematical concepts represent things that are not concepts - presumably non-mental objects in the external, spatial world.
>>7598071
this is why philosophy is dumb and died off
>>7597927
no it was the buddha. and the the buddha says that it is not worth it to take this thinking seriously, especially when this thinking clings to emotions felt.
through meditation, you make this thinking and the consciousness cease and notice that they do not belong to you [since you cannot control them and their content].
>>7598072
so do concepts described by other languages like english or chinese or c++ or sheet music, what the fuck is ur point faggot
>>7598064
>reductionism
>>7598072
His word choice was awful and he deserves to be called a retard
>>7598071
>Consider how everything invented is geared toward us
Because we invented it you mongoloid. There is no such thing as a form of a chair for the same reason there is no such thing as a form of brickcorner when you cut the edge off of a brick. These things are composed of various forms, they are not the forms themselves
>>7598085
That picture is off-putting
>>7598091
forms are a spook the greeks are gay
>>7598076
No, Nietzsche is even more skeptical than Buddha here. Buddha still believed in Anatta, whereas Nietzsche went so far as to deny even that.
>>7598095
spooks are spooks ur gay
>If I lean on extreme skepticism, my retardation is justifiable!
nah, fuck off back to reddit
>>7598098
how can u prove forms exists if u cant even prove u exist? seems kinda gay breh
>>7598078
My first point was to bring up the difference between representations and what they represent, which despite being a pretty basic distinction was still too bewildering to >>7598063
My second point was to be a giant drooling cockgagged gimp, unworthy of an invitation to your thirteenth birthday party, master.
>>7598121
Lrn2write
>>7598096
>Buddha still believed in Anatta
what does that mean ?
>>7598148
http://www.britannica.com/topic/anatta
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mind-indian-buddhism/#1.1
