What Can We Truly Know About Our Existence?

  • Thread starter Thread starter robert
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Existence
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the philosophical question of existence, particularly focusing on the nature of one's own existence and the existence of external objects. Participants explore concepts related to self-awareness, the reliability of sensory perception, and the implications of thought processes on the understanding of reality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the only certainty is one's own mind's existence, while others suggest that thought processes themselves affirm existence.
  • A participant questions how to define thought and proposes that thoughts could be a result of physical processes involving particles.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that proving existence is subjective and relies on convincing others of one's existence.
  • Some assert that matter exists independently of consciousness, citing physical objects like keyboards as evidence.
  • Counterarguments are presented regarding the reliability of sensory perception, suggesting that what we perceive could be constructs of the mind.
  • Participants discuss the implications of existence over time, questioning whether matter exists if it cannot be verified in the future.
  • Logical fallacies are pointed out, particularly in arguments that assume the existence of what they are trying to prove.
  • There is a discussion on skepticism regarding the nature of reality and whether it can be trusted as a fact-based reality.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on existence, with no clear consensus reached. Some agree on the existence of matter, while others challenge this notion and emphasize the subjective nature of perception and reality.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in proving existence based on sensory data and the philosophical implications of assuming the reality of perceived objects. The discussion remains open-ended regarding the definitions and assumptions underlying the arguments presented.

  • #31
the reason i was arguing the existence of matter was to get ur13 to think differently about existence. I originally asked if you could prove you exist and then the whole issue of "i think therefore I am" came up, so I was arguing that maybe there is no thought and that its just the compilation of particles creating some sort of thought. The main thing I'm asking is whether or not we exist, but that always leads to thought so I brought the question of what is thought. Sorry for any confusion, I hope this makes sense. So prove you exist, and if you use thought as an argument, prove you have thought.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
well to prove existence one does not need to use thought but if you could
[1] have thought of self or being a single entity then you are done...
so to define thought regardless of if it is byproduct or not OR whether you exist in our PHYSICS world or MATRIX world...I'd say fif you can create the feeling of "I" then you have thought...

[2] thus comes the definition of feeling or sensation...or ability to see or feel ones self move...ah its great to watch little kids first learning the function of a mirror...my niece took 2 tries to understand it but it was cute as she tried to touch the image.

so how would you define feeling or sensation. I don't know i guess it would be the ability to react under contact. this may be also be leading to the definition of instinct...

...i'll think more on my definitions but how would you define those 3 terms.
 
  • #33
robert said:
But how do you define what thought is? What I'm trying to say is how do you know your thoughts arnt a compilation of tiny particles all working together to create some bigger thought. Its hard to explain but it makes sense in my mind. At least what I think is my mind.

How do you define what anything is. Anyway point being, even if my thoughts are tiny particles working together to create something, which is what a thought is, the particles have to exist somewhere to create the thought, so therefore if the thought exist, then you do. Consciousness is happening now, so something must exist.
I think the question of whether or not we really exist isn't a great one. Even if the world and universe we live in, doesn't exist. Something must, or else we wouldn't have any thoughts or have our own made up world or whatever. Its pretty obvious, that something exists. And no one ask me to prove it. Because i can only prove to myself that i exist using logic. You can do it for youself too. Whether anything else does, well yes i guess it does. My mind exist, and in that mind exists other things. Whether the world around me is apart of my mind or not is a different thing.
 
  • #34
Robert: what's your exact definition of existence?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
7K
Replies
41
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K