What Am I?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-01-2016, 07:58 PM (This post was last modified: 15-01-2016 08:06 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
What Am I?
Hello All.

My name is Shane.
I have a world view but I am unsure what others would call it.

I once thought I was Atheist & then thought I was Agnostic, but now I am not sure if these world view properly depicts mines.

It is a basic unprovable "brain in a vat or not" that haunts me.



I do not accept that anything is absolutely true or absolutely exists other than these thoughts. These thoughts do exist and it would be illogical to dismiss it.
I do not even know for a fact if the entity I call "I" is the real me or am I being forced to relive the thought process of another entity. Therefore I may not be who I think I am. For all intents and purposes I will continue to call myself "I" to keep it simple.

By process of elimination;
How can I be a Theist, an Atheist, an Agnostic, a Solipsist or even an Individual considering that I do not accept the following absolutes:

God is absolutely true or Absolutely exists. Therefore not a Theist.
God is absolutely not true or absolutely does not exist. Therefore not an Atheist.
Material things are absolutely true or absolutely exists. Therefore not an Agnostic.
Material things are absolutely not true or absolutely does not exist. Therefore not a Solipsist.
I am absolutely me & I absolutely exist. Therefore not an Individual.

I do accept that:
Thoughts absolutely exist & everything else is absolutely unknowable.
So what do you call that?

What do you call someone that believes nothing can be proven to be absolutely true or absolutely exist except this "thing" we call thoughts. How thoughts exist, how you define what a thought is and who owns them doesn't disprove it's existence.
Please note I did not say "my thoughts" only "thoughts"

Help Please?

be·lief/bəˈlēf/
noun
an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

know/nō/
verb
be aware of through observation, inquiry, or information.

a·the·ism/ˈāTHēˌizəm/
noun
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

ag·nos·tic/aɡˈnästik/
noun
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

sol·ip·sism/ˈsälipˌsizəm/
noun
the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist.

the·ism/ˈTHēˌizəm/
noun
belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.

in·di·vid·u·al/ˌindəˈvij(o͞o)əl/
adjective
single; separate.
of or for a particular person.
noun
a single human being as distinct from a group, class, or family.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2016, 08:10 PM
RE: What Am I?
What are you ? A mental fapper.

Go bash your head into that rock over there, about 5 times, then come back and try to tell us you don't know if it really exists.

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
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
15-01-2016, 08:15 PM (This post was last modified: 15-01-2016 08:35 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: What Am I?
I would know the thought process of pain absolutely exists.
Still falls under the category of thought.
How can you absolutely prove you are not a a brain in a vat being fed electrical impulses that creates an illusion of pain in the given situation?
How can you prove that pain is real outside of mere thoughts?

Logic is my mother language. I learned this before English.
Disprove the logic in my statements please.

I do not deny you may be right but how can you be absolutely certain it is real outside of a mere thought process?

I will take your reply to mean I do not fall under any of the listed categories and I have the first label in my quest to find out what to classify myself as.

Nominations:
Bucky Ball - Mental Fapper (world view definition still pending)

Thank you, keep them coming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Agnostic Shane's post
15-01-2016, 08:35 PM
RE: What Am I?
(15-01-2016 08:15 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  How can you absolutely prove you are not a a brain in a vat being fed electrical impulses that creates an illusion of pain in the given situation?
How can you prove that pain is real outside of mere thoughts?

To both questions, you can't. However, there is no reason to believe we are a brain in a vat. Neither is there a reason to believe that only thoughts produce pain.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2016, 08:41 PM (This post was last modified: 15-01-2016 08:45 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: What Am I?
(15-01-2016 08:15 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I would know the thought process of pain absolutely exists.
Still falls under the category of thought.
How can you absolutely prove you are not a a brain in a vat being fed electrical impulses that creates an illusion of pain in the given situation?
How can you prove that pain is real outside of mere thoughts?

Logic is my mother language. I learned this before English.
Disprove the logic in my statements please.

I do not deny you may be right but how can you be absolutely certain it is real outside of a mere thought process?

I will take your reply to mean I do not fall under any of the listed categories and I have the first label in my quest to find out what to classify myself as.

Nominations:
Bucky Ball - Mental Fapper (world view definition still pending)

Thank you, keep them coming.

Pain is not a "thought process". It's a reflex. You have no control over it. And you LEARN what processes produce it. And you intentionally avoid them.
If you came back bloodied and in pain from the rock, and were still asking your dopey questions, then I would hope you are a brain in a vat. Your scenario is one of countless ones that could be constructed. So what ? (That's the REAL question).

Instead of "mental fapper", put me down for "has too much time on his hands".
Facepalm

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
15-01-2016, 08:53 PM
RE: What Am I?
(15-01-2016 08:35 PM)GenesisNemesis Wrote:  
(15-01-2016 08:15 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  How can you absolutely prove you are not a a brain in a vat being fed electrical impulses that creates an illusion of pain in the given situation?
How can you prove that pain is real outside of mere thoughts?

To both questions, you can't. However, there is no reason to believe we are a brain in a vat. Neither is there a reason to believe that only thoughts produce pain.

Thank you for such a logical explanation Genesis Nemesis.
Would you be kind enough to answer a few more of my questions please.

I already stated the one thing I absolutely believe in and I have provided evidence for it. Thoughts do exist and we all already have the evidence for that. I am assuming here we both share this same belief.
You have now come to me with a claim that there are things other than thoughts which do exist.
Would I be wrong to ask for evidence to substantiate your claim?
Is it not the proper thing to do, when presented with a claim that you do not share the same belief in, to ask for evidence? If the evidence is presented to you is it not your right to question it's validity based on the methodology used to obtain the evidence?
If the methodology used to gain Evidence is based on an assumption that cannot be absolutely proven then is it not safe to say that the evidence is inadmissible?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2016, 09:06 PM (This post was last modified: 15-01-2016 09:48 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: What Am I?
(15-01-2016 08:53 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I already stated the one thing I absolutely believe in and I have provided evidence for it. Thoughts do exist and we all already have the evidence for that.

No you don't, and you have produce no evidence for anything. You asserted you believe in thoughts. No evidence followed. If, as Brian Greene has postulated, Reality is PROGRAM running on the surface of the universe, what you perceive as "thought" may be programmed electrical pathways. You have no more "evidence" for "thoughts" (which is a subjective experience, any more or less, than you have for "pain"). They are both electrical activity in the brain. You have attempted to create false artificial categories, from the same thing. Why do you "believe" in one and not the other, if they are essentially the same thing ?
I thought you said "logic is my mother language". Apparently you also misjudged that, subjectively. Facepalm You haven't even defined what a "thought" is, much less produce "evidence'' for it.

Quote:I do accept that:
Thoughts absolutely exist & everything else is absolutely unknowable.
So what do you call that?

I'd call that a Presuppositionalist.

Quote:How thoughts exist, how you define what a thought is and who owns them doesn't disprove it's existence.

If you can't (bother to) define something you assert to be a "thing", yet claim you "believe" in, I'd say you're a Presuppositionalist theist.

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
15-01-2016, 09:38 PM
RE: What Am I?
(15-01-2016 08:41 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(15-01-2016 08:15 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I would know the thought process of pain absolutely exists.
Still falls under the category of thought.
How can you absolutely prove you are not a a brain in a vat being fed electrical impulses that creates an illusion of pain in the given situation?
How can you prove that pain is real outside of mere thoughts?

Logic is my mother language. I learned this before English.
Disprove the logic in my statements please.

I do not deny you may be right but how can you be absolutely certain it is real outside of a mere thought process?

I will take your reply to mean I do not fall under any of the listed categories and I have the first label in my quest to find out what to classify myself as.

Nominations:
Bucky Ball - Mental Fapper (world view definition still pending)

Thank you, keep them coming.

Pain is not a "thought process". It's a reflex. You have no control over it. And you LEARN what processes produce it. And you intentionally avoid them.
If you came back bloodied and in pain from the rock, and were still asking your dopey questions, then I would hope you are a brain in a vat. Your scenario is one of countless ones that could be constructed. So what ? (That's the REAL question).

Instead of "mental fapper", put me down for "has too much time on his hands".
Facepalm

I am not arguing here my friend. I am simply trying to understand your logic.
If it makes logical sense I will agree that it makes logical sense. If however it does not stand the test of logic then I cannot accept your conclusion & vice versa. Can we both agree to this at the very least before we move on?
I am not sure how pain can be used to prove that something physically exists. It doesn't prove the "rock" exists as it could just as easily have been an oyster. Maybe you are using an unscientific method of testing for the existence of something.
Are you trying to claim that pain is real. Is it any more real than Love or Hate? Are all of these things not part of the "thought process"?
Consider the following statement:
There are objective realities and perspective realities. Agreed? If not I will try to elaborate.
I can understand (to a degree) that the rock, the blood & the wounds are real because they can be physically observed to exist. They are objective realities regardless of your perspective.
Pain is simply perception though the process of thought via the brain.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/in...n/pain.htm
It is a part of the "thought process" as far as medical science is concerned.
It is not a physical thing. It is no more real than "love or hate" from an objective stand point.

Not that I am saying love & hate isn't real, but I am simply dealing with the evidence you provided me to prove that something is real.

How does banging my head on a rock prove that the rock is real?
How can pain exist without a "thought process"?
If the electrical impulses never reaches the brain to form a thought process how can pain possibly exist?

I opted out of Religion a long time ago in pursuit of a more logical world view.
I am still seeking to label my world view & I came here to ask for help in finding this label if it already exists or to give it a new name.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Agnostic Shane's post
15-01-2016, 09:48 PM
RE: What Am I?
Your post kind of reminds me of a yogic view called Advaita Vedanta. I don't agree with this yogic view--I'm more in-line with the Tantra-style/view of things in terms of my philosophy of life. I am an atheist, but I have incorporated some yogic philosophies/principles into my way of life.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2016, 09:53 PM
RE: What Am I?
(15-01-2016 09:06 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(15-01-2016 08:53 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I already stated the one thing I absolutely believe in and I have provided evidence for it. Thoughts do exist and we all already have the evidence for that.

No you don't. If, as Brian Greene has postulated, Reality is PROGRAM running on the surface of the universe, what you perceive as "thought" may be programmed electrical pathways. You have no more "evidence" for "thoughts" (which is a subjective experience, any more or less than you have for "pain"). They are both electrical activity in the brain. You attempted to create false artificial categories of the same thing. I thought you said "logic is my mother language". Apparently you also misjudged that, subjectively. Facepalm
You haven't even defined what a "thought" is, much less produce "evidence' for it.
Thanks again Bucky for such a quick response but I think you missed the part in my original post where I stated:
"How thoughts exist, how you define what a thought is and who owns them doesn't disprove it's existence."
Can you accurately define what a black hole is?
Do you claim that black holes do not exist?
Should we deny the existence of something simply because we cannot explain how it works even if we have found evidence that it physically changes the observable universe?

Here is a practical example of how to make a valid argument for the existence of something that hasn't been scientifically proven:
Before 1968 we had never observed a Quark.
We observed that a Proton behaved in such a manner that it would appear there are particles inside it that cause it move in a certain way.
We decided to call these theoretical particles Quarks until we can define what they are.
This is called Theoretical Science
There is a base premise that lead to the conclusion that something existed.
Scientists were not ridiculed for their Theory because they provided evidence for the existence of Theoretical Quarks.
Should they be found to be something we already knew existed we would not have called them Quarks but it still would not mean that whatever it was didn't exist.
In 1968 we found 1 Quark, starting the process of the discovery of 5 more Quarks ending in 1995.
They were unlike anything we observed before thus the name Quark was kept.

The word "thought" is used in the same way we use the word Quark in 1968.
In what scientific circle does proving the existence of something require a full definition and understanding of that something?
Last time I check we only need to observe the interaction of a "thing" with other things to confirm it's existence. Not knowing what it is doesn't disprove it's existence.

I am open to correction if my logic fails at any given point, I hope you will be willing to reciprocate my openness
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: