Is There Any Way to Confirm Your Existence?

[ValenceE]

'guess they DO reconcile at infinity... where nothing matters...


VE

 

[minorwork]

I am amazed that a frenchman and englishman do not war over the word 'livre' or 'book' when some Jew and some Islamic war on each other over, what the word 'God'?

 

[Jake Kenner]

What if all that really exists is empty space-the void-nothingness?

How can an observable physical universe be constructed out of empty space?

Read Lenny Susskind’s new book: The Black Hole War. The “answer” is the holographic principle of quantum gravity. The observable world is a holographic animation that is defined on viewing screens of quantized space-time. This apparent three dimensional world is defined on a two dimensional surface. The holographic principle says that all the information for the world is encoded on the viewing screen with one bit of information per Planck area. That information is energy that flows in an energy gradient from big bang event to black hole. The ordered flow of information is reflected in the second law of thermodynamics as energy flows from more ordered states to less ordered states. Every observable state is constructed on the viewing screen as the quantum state of potentiality is reduced to an actual state. A quantum state reduction defines an observational event. Those observable states are holographically animated on the viewing screen over a sequence of ordered events. The viewing screen of quantized space-time is the matrix. Susskind even called the first holographic theory he discovered “Matrix Theory”. The viewing screens are embedded within empty space. If string theory is right then empty space is ten dimensional and super-symmetric. The holographic principle basically says that empty space is quantized into surfaces of quantized space-time that act as viewing screens that project holographic images back to focal points of perception. The laws of physics are the computational rules that arise as empty space is quantized into surfaces of quantized space-time and encodes information. The laws of physics are all a consequence of the symmetries of empty space.

Listen to this quote from Einstein: “I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists”. Now listen to Spinoza: “That eternal and infinite being we call God, or Nature, acts from the same necessity from which It exists”. The holographic principle basically says that empty space acts from the same necessity from which it exists as it is quantized into surfaces of quantized space-time that act as viewing screens that project holographic images to focal points of perception. The holographic images are animated over an ordered sequence of observable events. The necessity from which empty space acts is the symmetry inherent in its existence. But who is the observer?

Listen to what Einstein has to say about this: “The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility. Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe”. But what is the nature of that comprehending spirit that is manifest in the laws of the universe? Could that comprehending spirit be empty space? Could empty space be the nature of consciousness? Is the focal point of perception a point in empty space? Is the observer a focal point of perception in empty space?

The holographic images projected from the viewing screen are coherently organized. Just like the holographic images that are created from the coherent light emitted from a laser, holography is only possible because of critical phenomena or spontaneous symmetry breaking. Symmetry breaking is the reason why information is coherently organized on the viewing screen. In some sense all holographic images are a consequence of broken symmetries. But empty space is perfectly symmetric. Does perfectly symmetric empty space perceive and recognize itself in the projected holographic images it constructs out of itself? Does the viewing screen of quantized space-time mirror the nature of empty space back to itself as broken symmetries? If empty space is the nature of consciousness then does that mean that the perceivable physical universe as it is holographically defined on viewing screens of quantized space-time only exists within consciousness? Does everything that appears to happen in the perceivable physical world only play in the imagination of empty space?

 

[minorwork]

Conscious. The seat of consciousness is the void. In the void, the grain of sand, is known.

From: Peirce's Pragmatic Theory of Inquiry page 86 http://books.google.com/books?hl=en...=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result#PPA86,M1

For Peirce the entire universe is a massive evolving form. It began infinitely long ago from a field of tychism or pure chance. Effectively the universe was nothing but a vast seething chaos with no order whatsoever. But through complete chance a pattern was started, what Peirce calls habit or continuity, Whereby one event begins to repeat itself. Steadily it began to form a general law (although still really a habit). These were the first laws of the universe, which had to evolve into being. And this is what Peirce means by synechism.

The first thing to happen was the habit of forming habits.

Existence is the forming of habits? Does this help answer the topic's question?

 

[IamWhatIam]

'I exist, but I doubt your existence'.This statement has great deal of dependency on how you define 'I' and 'existence'. Let's talk about 'I' first. When you said - "I exist", did you mean 'I' as body or mind or memory or intellect or perception?

If 'I' is any of the above, it is not even worth pondering over existnce, because all of these have an end. Body is chnaging, so is mind,memory,intellect and even perception. What use is there in finding out about existence unless we know what we really are searching for?

Body is just inert, a composition of organs and a biological product which can not think. If body can think,it would have avoided many accidents and many robberies (when we are asleep, body is still awake). We are observing bodily chnages and hence we are NOT the body.

Mind is nothing but bunch of thoughts. Moreover it is changeful. We are
everytime observing changes in mood and mindset which means we are not even mind. Same case with memory, intellect and perception. Dont we say
our 'perception' changes? We are none of these..who are we then?

We are the basis of all these. We are that consciousness which is aware of all these changes but it itself is unknown to any of it's byproducts. This consciousness,being the primal thing, it can not be known by mind or any organs. Its like trying to find infinite using the finite.

 

[Dadface]

Since his demise Descartes still has an earthly existence,he was processed at the meat factory.I just received this message.
I'm pink therefore I'm ham.
Is there no way we can shut him up?

 

[tabloid]

for sure,we can't all exist at the same time.One person exists at a time,which means that no one is really "free" except the one who exists

 

[baywax]

'I exist, but I doubt your existence'.This statement has great deal of dependency on how you define 'I' and 'existence'. Let's talk about 'I' first. When you said - "I exist", did you mean 'I' as body or mind or memory or intellect or perception?

If 'I' is any of the above, it is not even worth pondering over existnce, because all of these have an end. Body is chnaging, so is mind,memory,intellect and even perception. What use is there in finding out about existence unless we know what we really are searching for?

Body is just inert, a composition of organs and a biological product which can not think. If body can think,it would have avoided many accidents and many robberies (when we are asleep, body is still awake). We are observing bodily chnages and hence we are NOT the body.

Mind is nothing but bunch of thoughts. Moreover it is changeful. We are
everytime observing changes in mood and mindset which means we are not even mind. Same case with memory, intellect and perception. Dont we say
our 'perception' changes? We are none of these..who are we then?

We are the basis of all these. We are that consciousness which is aware of all these changes but it itself is unknown to any of it's byproducts. This consciousness,being the primal thing, it can not be known by mind or any organs. Its like trying to find infinite using the finite.

Whom are you talking to?

 

[Brilliant!]

Why does it matter? You'll always be conscious of the presence (whether real or not) of others. If you decide they don't exist, and avoid them, then you accept there is something to avoid. If you decide they don't exist, but continue to interact regardless, then life hasn't changed drastically. Your outlook has certainly changed, but it has no effect on those who don't exist, and life goes on.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I don't exist. However, it is a comfort to learn that you do.

 

[minorwork]

We are the basis of all these. We are that consciousness which is aware of all these changes but it itself is unknown to any of it's byproducts. This consciousness,being the primal thing, it can not be known by mind or any organs. Its like trying to find infinite using the finite.

You've caught my attention with, "This consciousness, being the primal thing..."

Hoffman caught my attention in his short essay (7 paragraphs) at The Edge with just that assessment, consciousness as primal. Ninth one down here: http://www.edge.org/q2005/q05_4.html"

Work in consciousness is being pursued by Donald D. Hoffman. Department of Cognitive Sciences. University of California. Irvine, California 92697. Here is his paper: http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/ConsciousRealism2.pdf" .

 

[IamWhatIam]

Mr Baywax, I was referring to threadstarter..

Mr Minorwork, thanks for the link of the thesis..Donald D. Hoffman did really make sincere efforts on expounding this puzzle of body-mind issue. Cool to know that you too gave your time for that!

After going through it, i have few ideas to share,, :shy:

Every scientific theory must take something as Fundamental.I feel that consciousness is the basis of all including the brain function and reaction of nurons and not vice versa..Consciousness being the most finer, apparently it is more prevalent and mysterious than the grosser appearances as biological reactions or perceptions etc. Consciousness must be the necessary sub stratrum for any of the other phenomenon and as such I would like to call it as 'beginningless'.

And anything without beginning indicates, it has no end either. If anything has begun at somepoint, it means that it did not exist before that point, it is finite. Consciousness having no beginning and end is infinite.There can not be two infinites either, so whatever exists, is included in this ONE infinite Consciousness.

When it comes to reality, only this consciousness is worth being called Real because it is ever-existing. As such, this world, with all it's names and forms are but a fantastic illusion. If, on the contrary, the world is a self-existent reality (that is what we evidently mean by objectivity), what prevents the world from revealing itself to us in sleep? We do not say 'we did not exist' in our sleep.

One may ask, The world may not be conscious of itself, yet it exists.

Answer is, Consciousness is always Self-consciousness. If you are conscious of anything you are essentially conscious of yourself. Unselfconscious existence is a contradiction in terms. It is no existence at all. It is merely attributed existence, whereas true existence, is not an attribute, it is the substance itself. It is the substratum(Reality). Reality is therefore known being knowledgabe and conscious, and never merely the one to the exclusion of the other. The world neither exists by itself, nor is it conscious of its existence. How can we say that such a world is real?And what is the nature of the world? It is perpetual change, a continuous, interminable flux. A dependent, unselfconscious, ever-changing world cannot be real. thanks for your time

 

[minorwork]

Mr Baywax, I was referring to threadstarter..

Mr Minorwork, thanks for the link of the thesis..Donald D. Hoffman did really make sincere efforts on expounding this puzzle of body-mind issue. Cool to know that you too gave your time for that!

After going through it, i have few ideas to share,, :shy:

Every scientific theory must take something as Fundamental.I feel that consciousness is the basis of all including the brain function and reaction of nurons and not vice versa..Consciousness being the most finer, apparently it is more prevalent and mysterious than the grosser appearances as biological reactions or perceptions etc. Consciousness must be the necessary sub stratrum for any of the other phenomenon and as such I would like to call it as 'beginningless'.

And anything without beginning indicates, it has no end either. If anything has begun at somepoint, it means that it did not exist before that point, it is finite. Consciousness having no beginning and end is infinite.There can not be two infinites either, so whatever exists, is included in this ONE infinite Consciousness.

When it comes to reality, only this consciousness is worth being called Real because it is ever-existing. As such, this world, with all it's names and forms are but a fantastic illusion. If, on the contrary, the world is a self-existent reality (that is what we evidently mean by objectivity), what prevents the world from revealing itself to us in sleep? We do not say 'we did not exist' in our sleep.

One may ask, The world may not be conscious of itself, yet it exists.

Answer is, Consciousness is always Self-consciousness. If you are conscious of anything you are essentially conscious of yourself. Unselfconscious existence is a contradiction in terms. It is no existence at all. It is merely attributed existence, whereas true existence, is not an attribute, it is the substance itself. It is the substratum(Reality). Reality is therefore known being knowledgabe and conscious, and never merely the one to the exclusion of the other. The world neither exists by itself, nor is it conscious of its existence. How can we say that such a world is real?And what is the nature of the world? It is perpetual change, a continuous, interminable flux. A dependent, unselfconscious, ever-changing world cannot be real. thanks for your time

That's pretty darn impressive. How long have you been considering this? I be 58 and except for 31 years mining coal have been considering this stuff since kindergarten or whenever mom run over Snoopy the dog and praying didn't bring him back. That was when I saw what could happen to me if mom squashed me. I studied some physics and got a degree in philosophy and went mining, flying and skydiving.

Subconscious, unconscious, semiconscious, supraconscious, all describe varying degrees or boundaries of types of consciousness. Some boundaries are clear others not so.

Subconscious those things that are imprinted in you from this life, especially from youth, that you may not be aware influences your actions and thoughts in the moment.

Unconscious has built your body from a single cell into the body you have today and keeps it functioning without your direct decisions. Automatic in nature.

Semiconscious dream states resemble watching a movie that you either can or can't become emotionally involved with to varying degrees while being in the scenes.

Supraconscious levels of awareness are those that result from the shutting down of the multimodal interface that encompasses all of the above states. If enough preparation has been done the brain can record sounds and sights without processing to symbols and interpretting the symbols. An AM radio talk show in your native tongue will be a sweet compelling music that draws you to its source. Hearing this without processing is very strange. Concentration and attitude be the keys.

Stranger still is the recording in memory of a conscious experience of turning off that part of the interface that gives the impression of gravity or that part which gives the point of view of experiencing from within the body. Even the dream body can be dropped. Now we're talking some pretty innate fears that have much power and connection to the emotions thru the hormonal functions of the body. These are not trivial and like I said, are innate. The experience of these altered states will not be for long periods. Balance returns as a response to mind generated fear. Almost instantly. Drug free. This is essential. Drugs will only anchor the view to the body and ill effects must be metabolized out, which can take long amounts of time while in a negative state.

Experiences traveling spiritually are not to be mistaken for a having a basis in the reality of the objective world. Spiritual traveling is purely subjective. Some return as fanatics and have difficulty functioning in society. Not necessary, but it happens to those in a hurry.

 

[IamWhatIam]

That's pretty darn impressive. How long have you been considering this? I be 58 and except for 31 years mining coal have been considering this stuff since kindergarten or whenever mom run over Snoopy the dog and praying didn't bring him back. That was when I saw what could happen to me if mom squashed me. I studied some physics and got a degree in philosophy and went mining, flying and skydiving.

Subconscious, unconscious, semiconscious, supraconscious, all describe varying degrees or boundaries of types of consciousness. Some boundaries are clear others not so.

Subconscious those things that are imprinted in you from this life, especially from youth, that you may not be aware influences your actions and thoughts in the moment.

Unconscious has built your body from a single cell into the body you have today and keeps it functioning without your direct decisions. Automatic in nature.

Semiconscious dream states resemble watching a movie that you either can or can't become emotionally involved with to varying degrees while being in the scenes.

Supraconscious levels of awareness are those that result from the shutting down of the multimodal interface that encompasses all of the above states. If enough preparation has been done the brain can record sounds and sights without processing to symbols and interpretting the symbols. An AM radio talk show in your native tongue will be a sweet compelling music that draws you to its source. Hearing this without processing is very strange. Concentration and attitude be the keys.

Stranger still is the recording in memory of a conscious experience of turning off that part of the interface that gives the impression of gravity or that part which gives the point of view of experiencing from within the body. Even the dream body can be dropped. Now we're talking some pretty innate fears that have much power and connection to the emotions thru the hormonal functions of the body. These are not trivial and like I said, are innate. The experience of these altered states will not be for long periods. Balance returns as a response to mind generated fear. Almost instantly. Drug free. This is essential. Drugs will only anchor the view to the body and ill effects must be metabolized out, which can take long amounts of time while in a negative state.

Experiences traveling spiritually are not to be mistaken for a having a basis in the reality of the objective world. Spiritual traveling is purely subjective. Some return as fanatics and have difficulty functioning in society. Not necessary, but it happens to those in a hurry.

LOL. I am 29 and have been pondering these for roughly about 3-4 years..

There is only one state, that of consciousness or awareness or existence.Most likely,the three states of waking, dream and deep sleep cannot be real. They simply come and go. The real will always exist. The "I" or existence that alone persists in all the three states is real. The other three are not real and so it is not possible to say they have such and such degree of reality. We may roughly put it like this, Existence or consciousness is the only reality. Consciousness plus waking, we call waking. Consciousness plus sleep, we call sleep. Consciousness plus dream, we call dream. Consciousness is the screen, on which all the pictures come and go. The screen is real, the pictures are mere shadows on it. Because by long habit, we have been regarding these three states as real, we call the state of mere awareness or consciousness the fourth. There is however, no fourth state, but only one state.

I have read a wonderful yet scientific explanation of sage Ramana of India saying--There is no difference between dream and the waking state except that the dream is short and the waking long. Both are the result of the mind. Because the waking state is long, we imagine that it is our real state. But, as a matter of fact, our real state is Turiya or the fourth state which is always as it is and knows nothing of the three states of waking, dream or deep sleep. Because we call these three states we call the fourth state also SUPERconscious state.But it is not a state but the real and natural state of the Self. When this is realized, we know it is not a fourth state, for a fourth state is only relative, but the transcendent state.

Yes, when in hurry, things will turn crazy and people end up in a mess..when take things in the true light , it is okay

 

[minorwork]

Last year I came upon the work of cognitive scientist http://www.geocities.com/changizi/".

Changizi's insight is that the moving brain is constantly trying to project a tenth of a second into the future and is selected by evolution mechanisms for the best perception of that future. His explanations of the 'whys' and 'wherefors' of illusions are fascinating.
An excerpt from http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=understanding-how-our-bra&page=2":

If the dictionary study involves cultural evolution as its driver, then the new work on the visual system involves natural selection–based evolution. Why is it that we need to "perceive the present," as you put it, or see into the future? Animals who move or are in a world that moves around them—as long as there are things moving somehow relative to you—will be selected to have perceptions that are true. We have about a tenth of a second delay between the time light hits the retina and the time of resultant perception, which is considerable given that you move 10 centimeters [four inches] in that amount of time even if you're only walking one meter [3.3 feet] per second. That means that if you didn't compensate for this neural delay, anything you perceive to be within 10 centimeters of passing…. [It] would have just passed you by the time you perceive it. You'd always be seeing the world as it was a tenth of a second earlier and seeing what the world looks like 10 centimeters behind where you in fact are--if you hadn't run into whatever it is you're looking for.

 

[baywax]

That's pretty darn impressive. How long have you been considering this? I be 58 and except for 31 years mining coal have been considering this stuff since kindergarten or whenever mom run over Snoopy the dog and praying didn't bring him back. That was when I saw what could happen to me if mom squashed me. I studied some physics and got a degree in philosophy and went mining, flying and skydiving.

Subconscious, unconscious, semiconscious, supraconscious, all describe varying degrees or boundaries of types of consciousness. Some boundaries are clear others not so.

Subconscious those things that are imprinted in you from this life, especially from youth, that you may not be aware influences your actions and thoughts in the moment.

Unconscious has built your body from a single cell into the body you have today and keeps it functioning without your direct decisions. Automatic in nature.

Semiconscious dream states resemble watching a movie that you either can or can't become emotionally involved with to varying degrees while being in the scenes.

Supraconscious levels of awareness are those that result from the shutting down of the multimodal interface that encompasses all of the above states. If enough preparation has been done the brain can record sounds and sights without processing to symbols and interpretting the symbols. An AM radio talk show in your native tongue will be a sweet compelling music that draws you to its source. Hearing this without processing is very strange. Concentration and attitude be the keys.

Stranger still is the recording in memory of a conscious experience of turning off that part of the interface that gives the impression of gravity or that part which gives the point of view of experiencing from within the body. Even the dream body can be dropped. Now we're talking some pretty innate fears that have much power and connection to the emotions thru the hormonal functions of the body. These are not trivial and like I said, are innate. The experience of these altered states will not be for long periods. Balance returns as a response to mind generated fear. Almost instantly. Drug free. This is essential. Drugs will only anchor the view to the body and ill effects must be metabolized out, which can take long amounts of time while in a negative state.

Experiences traveling spiritually are not to be mistaken for a having a basis in the reality of the objective world. Spiritual traveling is purely subjective. Some return as fanatics and have difficulty functioning in society. Not necessary, but it happens to those in a hurry.

Yes. I was referring to the thread in general.

 

[Qmystic]

Hello Prtcool,

Your basic question: is there any way I can prove your existence?

In my opinion, Yes. Are you looking for scientific proof? If you borrowed the general scientific method of theorizing, formulating a prediction and then designing a test which could falsify your theory, you could either prove I do exist or prove I do not exist. Either way you answer your question.

Shortcoming the process, I am here challenging your thoughts, am I not? If you are sure you exist, is not thinking part of your existence? Was Descartes right "I think, therefore I am"? If so, have I caused you to think? If you respond with either yes or no you had to "think" to arrive at your conclusion, forcing you to ask yourself what caused this thought/response. You at least have some data to process.

Please inform me of your conclusion, that is, if you conclude that I exist.

Qmystic

 

[IamWhatIam]

Last year I came upon the work of cognitive scientist http://www.geocities.com/changizi/".

Changizi's insight is that the moving brain is constantly trying to project a tenth of a second into the future and is selected by evolution mechanisms for the best perception of that future. His explanations of the 'whys' and 'wherefors' of illusions are fascinating.
An excerpt from http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=understanding-how-our-bra&page=2":

Thats fascinating, I will have to go through this work.

Mr, Qmystic, I think its correct. All of us do exist though each one creates his own universe. If I say 'I exist' and you don't exist, it is not fair. In that case I am not using same yard stick. If i state some rules / measures for me, why not for all. This issue is the deepest and most puzzling ..the more we think the more we sink seems...

 

[baywax]

Hello Prtcool,

Your basic question: is there any way I can prove your existence?

In my opinion, Yes. Are you looking for scientific proof? If you borrowed the general scientific method of theorizing, formulating a prediction and then designing a test which could falsify your theory, you could either prove I do exist or prove I do not exist. Either way you answer your question.

Shortcoming the process, I am here challenging your thoughts, am I not? If you are sure you exist, is not thinking part of your existence? Was Descartes right "I think, therefore I am"? If so, have I caused you to think? If you respond with either yes or no you had to "think" to arrive at your conclusion, forcing you to ask yourself what caused this thought/response. You at least have some data to process.

Please inform me of your conclusion, that is, if you conclude that I exist.

Qmystic

The argument will be that there is no way to prove the stimulus you are claiming to be you is not simply a neuronal bundle in Qmystic's brain firing and exciting another neuronal bundle in Qmystic's brain.

 

[Qmystic]

Hello baywax,

The argument will be that there is no way to prove the stimulus you are claiming to be you is not simply a neuronal bundle in Qmystic's brain firing and exciting another neuronal bundle in Qmystic's brain.

Your argument would make more sense if the firing of neuronal bundles were in Prtcool's brain, sense he is the only one to be certain of existence.

Meanwhile, why not work on submitting a prediction to test either argument?

Qmystic

 

[a4mula]

What ensures you that you exist? Cogito, ergo sum? Is that the answer?

Our ability to have cognitive thought is not justifiable proof of existence. Our senses, memories and experiences offer no absolute truth to our reality. Perception is all we have. We perceive ourselves as we perceive others. If you exist based on your perception, I must exist as well based on your same perception. If in turn I'm merely a figment of your imagination, or an artificial intelligent NPC populating your world, then it only stands to reason that you in turn are the same. Consciousness and awareness are very poor standards for existence. Within 50 years we'll create machines that are capable of both, yet their existence will be solely in the domain of zeros and ones.

 

[Unthinkable]

"Our ability to have cognitive thought is not justifiable proof of existence."
For you to question your existence you have to be able to think and therefore cognitive thought is justified as a question of what existence is. Existence is proof.

Our senses, memories and experiences offer no absolute truth to our reality.
When you are sensing you are part of reality. The truth is reality because that is what really happened. Thought is fantasy, sensing is reality.

Perception is all we have.
Is there no difference between thinking and reality? Is thinking a sense? Is experiencing a thought? Do you sense with your thoughts? Am I a figment of ...

"We perceive ourselves as we perceive others."
I think everyone is different therefore I do not perceive anybody. I try not to think therefore I am not but I still think when I write on here.

"If you exist based on your perception, I must exist as well based on your same perception."
I exist based on your perception. And thus you exist based on my perception. But existing is not perception and perception is not existing. The word perception originally meant to sense but I think that perception means thinking to you.

"If in turn I'm merely a figment of your imagination, or an artificial intelligent NPC populating your world, then it only stands to reason that you in turn are the same."
"If" is the wrong word to use if you are stating a fact, and this was not the first time for "if".

"Consciousness and awareness are very poor standards for existence."
You perceive therefore you are.

"Within 50 years we'll create machines that are capable of both, yet their existence will be solely in the domain of zeros and ones"
You could be a psychic like Nostradamus

 

[a4mula]

"Our ability to have cognitive thought is not justifiable proof of existence."
For you to question your existence you have to be able to think and therefore cognitive thought is justified as a question of what existence is. Existence is proof.

Our senses, memories and experiences offer no absolute truth to our reality.
When you are sensing you are part of reality. The truth is reality because that is what really happened. Thought is fantasy, sensing is reality.

Perception is all we have.
Is there no difference between thinking and reality? Is thinking a sense? Is experiencing a thought? Do you sense with your thoughts? Am I a figment of ...

"We perceive ourselves as we perceive others."
I think everyone is different therefore I do not perceive anybody. I try not to think therefore I am not but I still think when I write on here.

"If you exist based on your perception, I must exist as well based on your same perception."
I exist based on your perception. And thus you exist based on my perception. But existing is not perception and perception is not existing. The word perception originally meant to sense but I think that perception means thinking to you.

"If in turn I'm merely a figment of your imagination, or an artificial intelligent NPC populating your world, then it only stands to reason that you in turn are the same."
"If" is the wrong word to use if you are stating a fact, and this was not the first time for "if".

"Consciousness and awareness are very poor standards for existence."
You perceive therefore you are.

"Within 50 years we'll create machines that are capable of both, yet their existence will be solely in the domain of zeros and ones"
You could be a psychic like Nostradamus

Does the internet exist? How about a video game avatar? This goes back the brain in a vat paradox, yet today technology has removed the need for the brain, or the vat. I state nothing as fact, hence the reason I like philosophy. My point isn't that we don't exist, because it's difficult to fathom. My only point is that before we ask if others exist, we need to define existence and ourselves first.

 

[Dale]

I state nothing as fact

 

[skippy1729]

I am sure of my own existence as I do have a sense of self. But the question that I am asking is a rather vague one. Do you exist? If the answer is no then the very purpose of asking questions from the non existent is useless. Even all the solutions you give to me are useless. Even the scriptures like the Bible, the Gita also are of no help(afterall even they do not exist.)

What if I am seeing a virtual movie, in which all you people are virtual softwares. All the things that I believe in, all the past that has been told to me, even my own body, everything is just an illusion. I am talking of a supermatrix in which only one man is trapped in an illusion and everything else in the matrix is fake.

Now the question is, "Is there any way to confirm your existence?"

Short answer is no.

It is possible that there is one intelligent, powerful being in existence ... YOU. Out of boredom you have created a delusion of the universe and placed yourself in it. Why don't you have a harem of hundreds of beautiful women, great wealth and power? Well, you tried that the last few times and it was boring stuff too.

You will never know for certain until you die. It can be self destructive to dwell on questions such as these. Forget about it and enjoy the ride.

Best wishes, Skippy

PS Next time around I am going to try some of that "boring stuff".