Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-12-2015, 05:53 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
[Image: th?id=OIP.M5bf77719e7a8f0ca40ad631dfdfe8...;amp;h=300]

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
23-12-2015, 06:06 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
[Image: Edward-Norton-Self-Punch-Reach-Gif-In-Fi...e8xcyk.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like pablo's post
23-12-2015, 06:12 PM (This post was last modified: 23-12-2015 10:29 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(23-12-2015 05:48 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  You see, existence is the broadest of concepts, it embraces all concepts whatever, without it there is no understanding of any concepts at all, and therefore you will not be able to locate something in reality outside your mind, to correspond to a concept in your mind if you do not master the concept of existence.

Totally wrong.
Nonexistence also exists, if existence exists, as a part of Reality. Before you LEARN about reality, it still exists. Some things exists ONLY in your mind. Your definitions are useless and meaningless.
As long as your stupid god existed, nonexistence also was a part of Reality. Therefore, your god did not create reality, nor could it have created the very reality in which it MUST participate.

(23-12-2015 05:48 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  And the first experience of a conscious entity like us humans, it is the experience of existence, so that if you are not a conscious entity there cannot be any experience at all of anything, and first and foremost not the experience of existence itself.

Totally false. You know NOTHING (obviously) of child psychology. An infant's first experience is nothing like what you falsely claim. "I exist" is a complex concept. No newborn is able to formulate that concept.

(23-12-2015 05:48 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  When you are in a fainted spell, or in deep profound dreamless sleep, or in a coma, or in complete total anesthesia, you in effect do not exist while you are in those conditions, by which you are no different from a lump of meat the cells of which are animate, but there is no longer any entity that is you a human, and also no longer you a person.

Totally false. There are records of you in those states which you can observe, (as anyone who works in a hospital knows). Your statement if patently false. When you were in surgery , CHANGES were made to you, which you became aware of when you woke up. Your idea is false, and anyone who has had surgery knows. You may be asleep, but the physician is working on you. He/she is not working on something non-existent.

(23-12-2015 05:48 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  Twice in my lifetime I was in total anesthesia, when I got back to consciousness I could recall only that I was somewhat like talkative with the two doctors, the surgeon and the anesthesiologist, and the nurses, imagining myself to be such an absorbing speaker or err talker – and then I blanked out until I came back to consciousness again many hours later.

Irrelevant, and totally false. There are images available (MRI scans and CT scans) that show you have brain activity when you are unconscious. You are totally ignorant of science. You existed, whether you were aware of it or not, and there are ways to prove that.

(23-12-2015 05:48 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  So, for us humans, existence is in effect the experience of consciousness, which consciousness is the status in which we can experience everything like eating, drinking, pain in our abdomen, etc., like love and also sex, and very important the existence of other humans and of anything at all existing, even mental things i.e. thoughts in our mind.

Totally false. Unconscious humans exist. Brain dead humans exist. Humans with damaged brains exist, and they are not necessarily conscious. We see them every day. Your bullshit reeks of ignorance.
Go get an education, and stop making a fool of yourself. You are 13 years old, right ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
23-12-2015, 06:20 PM (This post was last modified: 23-12-2015 06:34 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(23-12-2015 05:48 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  You see, existence is the broadest of concepts, it embraces all concepts whatever, without it there is no understanding of any concepts at all, and therefore you will not be able to locate something in reality outside your mind, to correspond to a concept in your mind if you do not master the concept of existence.

So you're looking at reality as being a correspondence between something that exists outside my mind and a concept in my mind. This is not an unreasonable position and truth as correspondence is generally accepted. But what makes us think there is anything outside our own minds? Why should there be? I mean apart from our inability to imagine otherwise?

(23-12-2015 05:48 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  And the first experience of a conscious entity like us humans, it is the experience of existence, so that if you are not a conscious entity there cannot be any experience at all of anything, and first and foremost not the experience of existence itself.

So what I think you are saying in reference to your earlier posts is that "existence is the default state of consciousness" not "The default status of [non-conscious] things in the world is existence". I can agree with that.

(23-12-2015 05:48 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  I will dare to say that experience of consciousness is the permeating medium of our human existence; this experience of consciousness itself is insofar as conscious entities like us humans are concerned, it is in effect equivalent to existence.

The question I have is consciousness a necessary condition for existence? Does it even make sense to say that non-conscious entities exist?

(23-12-2015 05:48 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  I like very much to exchange thoughts with you, and I look forward with excitement to read your answer to my question above.

Calm down there Pachyderm. It ain't worth getting a hardon over.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
23-12-2015, 06:33 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
Wachy Pachy's concept is a well known fallacy. It's called "Solipsism".
It's been refuted 3 ways to Sunday.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism

https://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/Philosophy...ode43.html

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
23-12-2015, 06:42 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(23-12-2015 06:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Wachy Pachy's concept is a well known fallacy. It's called "Solipsism".
It's been refuted 3 ways to Sunday.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism

https://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/Philosophy...ode43.html

I'm not sure that's the Pachyderm's position but Girly has been accused of solipsism before and I respond "Not at all. I don't think I'm on solid ground to even affirm my own existence. I don't meet the minimum requirements to be a solipsist."

.....

Always remember though that I am batshit bonkers. Hobo

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
23-12-2015, 07:12 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
I'm always stupefied to discover people dwelling on this forum that have yet to understand that Girlyman and Girlyman alone is the locus of existence and that all else is illusions and existential parlor tricks. I thought one was subject to this epiphany by mere exposure of his holiness's presence, but alas, we still have non-believers in our midst. What simple minded fools.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Tartarus Sauce's post
23-12-2015, 07:36 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
So, for us humans, existence is in effect the experience of consciousness, which consciousness is the status in which we can experience everything like eating, drinking, pain in our abdomen, etc., like love and also sex, and very important the existence of other humans and of anything at all existing, even mental things i.e. thoughts in our mind.


Huh? My wife is asleep at my side right now and she still exists. Has nott gone nowhere!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2015, 07:52 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(23-12-2015 07:12 PM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  I'm always stupefied to discover people dwelling on this forum that have yet to understand that Girlyman and Girlyman alone is the locus of existence and that all else is illusions and existential parlor tricks. I thought one was subject to this epiphany by mere exposure of his holiness's presence, but alas, we still have non-believers in our midst. What simple minded fools.
Burn the heretics! Evil_monster

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Vosur's post
23-12-2015, 08:15 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(23-12-2015 05:48 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  Dear Girly, I am so glad that you have connected with me, you see I always hope that someone will actually connect with me, in particular with the end message I put at the bottom of my posts -- instead dodging everywhere, saying things which are to my observation not apropos to my invitation to everyone to work together, you and I toward achieving a common idea of what or how it is to prove something exists.


So, you want to know what is my idea of existence.

You say. "I am far more interested in your concept of existence. Can you describe that for me in a non-circular fashion which doesn't necessitate the presumption of your very existence in the first place?"

Have you read my first posts here?

You see, existence is the broadest of concepts, it embraces all concepts whatever, without it there is no understanding of any concepts at all, and therefore you will not be able to locate something in reality outside your mind, to correspond to a concept in your mind if you do not master the concept of existence.

And the first experience of a conscious entity like us humans, it is the experience of existence, so that if you are not a conscious entity there cannot be any experience at all of anything, and first and foremost not the experience of existence itself.

I will dare to say that experience of consciousness is the permeating medium of our human existence; this experience of consciousness itself is insofar as conscious entities like us humans are concerned, it is in effect equivalent to existence.

When you are in a fainted spell, or in deep profound dreamless sleep, or in a coma, or in complete total anesthesia, you in effect do not exist while you are in those conditions, by which you are no different from a lump of meat the cells of which are animate, but there is no longer any entity that is you a human, and also no longer you a person.

Twice in my lifetime I was in total anesthesia, when I got back to consciousness I could recall only that I was somewhat like talkative with the two doctors, the surgeon and the anesthesiologist, and the nurses, imagining myself to be such an absorbing speaker or err talker – and then I blanked out until I came back to consciousness again many hours later.

You see, I mentioned the experience of touching your nose and the nose of your partner in conversation and (s)he doing the same act, to come to know with certainty the existence of the nose in our face; and also I mentioned my eating corn grits and coming to the experience of the eating of corn grits and wherefore the existence of corn grits, and also the non-existence of corn grits in my home, when I have depleted my stock of corn grits; and I likewise mentioned how kids come to know the difference between existence and non-existence, when they finished all the ice cream in the freezer.

I think I also mentioned my own eventual dying as is the lot of all living things, which is the last experience of an event in process, which I will no longer be around to know that it has been completed, namely, the course of dying – although while in that process I know from experience in seeing how people die, that it will be like that.

So, for us humans, existence is in effect the experience of consciousness, which consciousness is the status in which we can experience everything like eating, drinking, pain in our abdomen, etc., like love and also sex, and very important the existence of other humans and of anything at all existing, even mental things i.e. thoughts in our mind.

Sounds like a tautology?

I was trying to tell someone here that what he thinks about a tautology is altogether to miss the purpose of what to him is a just a useless tautology.

Forgive me, tell me why according to that someone, I don't recall his name here, "Paco is Francisco" is a tautology, and also "The default status of things in the world is existence" is a tautology.

It is because according to him the subject and the predicate of such sentences are identical. Well, that is pretty smart of him, but not really of any genuine insight into things, which would be if he were into the habit and skill of seeing the bigger picture of things.

I said folks usually read a lot of things wrongly and it is because writers do not know any better, and they writers like their readers are also into rote recall of rote learning.

Forgive me, suppose as you are also I am sure of the idea that "Paco is Francisco" and "The default status of things in the world is existence" are tautology, and you are so intelligent to state that there isn't anything new to know from tautologies: suppose you do some really genuine and productive thinking, going beyond your self-routinized path of seeing into things, by asking yourself, whether there are people who come to know something new from "Paco is Francisco" and "The default status of things in the world is existence."

I like very much to exchange thoughts with you, and I look forward with excitement to read your answer to my question above.


Cheers!

Can you say Dumb Shit?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: