Can you prove your existence?

[theifprowess]

a dream isnt real. you might think you SEE or TOUCH or even SMELL something. but can you prove it to the person sitting next to you.

[Neb]

Originally posted by theifprowess: a dream isnt real. you might think you SEE or TOUCH or even SMELL something. but can you prove it to the person sitting next to you.

Can you prove to the person sitting next to you that there's a wall in front of you? Or a ceiling above you?

[WOLFGIR]

Regarding Descartes, he actually proves nothing then the in ability of the crowd. I think, there for I am. What?
What are you, and how do I know you think? No proof at all really. But then again you might start arguing what is proof if not another imagination of self serving trce of another beings footsteps or reality in an area?

The line of thought is simple, but not that simple. Every man or woman has to decide what they see as true or false and then challenge that border constantly to keep up to date. So if you think, fine for you, but you still don´t exist to me, I don´t believe in you!

See the duality of mind comes in the perplex sense of assuming that things are as they are to start with. Let go of the constant and let loose your mind. The truth of you is the definition of yourself. In one sense, you are all unique, but everyone that challenges you can take that away.

[WOLFGIR]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Barry the Sprout: quote: Originally posted by Yorick: Great topic Wolfgir Neb, I think you're on the money. Barry you're out of your tree [img]smile.gif[/img] You're attacking Descartes wording, not the concepts meaning. It could be said thus: AWARENESS PROVES EXISTENCE. Whether it is a identifyable individual self or not is irrelevent. Something is aware and experiencing this thought. Whatever that something is, I am at least part of it, or am it in totality. That is the proof.

I never had a tree to begin with, you can't prove nuffin. [img]smile.gif[/img]

I'm not attacking the wording, I did try and explain myself a little bit more fully but originally I used his wording only to more easily explain where it falls apart. Descartes says that we are aware therfore we exist. But how does he prove that we are aware in the first place? He doesn't... thats my problem with him. What he is effectively saying is that we are aware because we exist, yet we can prove we exist because we are aware. Fine, I have no problem assuming that if we are aware we must exist, but I have a problem just assuming that I am aware. It seems that Descartes entire proof rests on its very flaw - that the concepts of existance and sentience are inseperable (as far as proof of existance goes). But in making them inseperable he finds no clear way to prove the existance of one or the other without first pre-supposing the existance of its counterpart. The idea of the Demon creates more problems than it solves I think.[/QUOTE]LOL! Simply being aware or having a thought proves itself. If one is thinking, that proves one is thinking. If one is aware that proves one is aware. It's an inescapable reality. One cannot contemplate for even a microsecond without provig they are contemplating by the very act.

Thus by initiating a thought process - any at all - one proves one exists.

The counter - thinking that one doesn't exist and is not thinking - is an impossibility and a contradiction.

Nothing - no thing - is destroyed by a single thought, just as the smallest beam of light destroys absence of light.

Barry, if we continue this discussion any further we are in danger of being so far up our a***s that we'll come back out our mouths inside out. [/QUOTE]Well you prove your existense in a sense or the assuming that the ideas are yours to begin with, but you don´t prove yourself to another person. And why would a thought prove yourself? If a line of thought is prove of existense then should future AI be seen as persons with rights? Hmmm ? I know hehe longshots! But I have celebrated midsummer today and am a bit woozy

The line of thought is good as long as you take certain assumptions as the truth!

Originally posted by theifprowess: i like the one post against me saying that for every sense you had a different item to explain. not 1 item but 5 different items.to distingush wether or not ONE THING exists it must be proven with 3of your 5 senses. a rose petal you can feel it smell it and see it there for it is real.

Oh! My post was not against you personally or your ideas!
It was just my answers to your questions. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 06-21-2002, 09:27 PM: Message edited by: Moni ]

[Kakero]

Originally posted by Neb : Can you prove to the person sitting next to you that there's a wall in front of you? Or a ceiling above you?

what happen if the person sitting next to you don't even know that you exist?

[The Hunter of Jahanna]

posted 06-21-2002 09:09 PM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Neb : Can you prove to the person sitting next to you that there's a wall in front of you? Or a ceiling above you? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- what happen if the person sitting next to you don't even know that you exist?

If the person sitting next to you doesnt know you exist then you smack them in the face and then push them into Neb's wall. When confronted by so much stimulus the must concede both yours and the walls existence based on the effect you have on them. Think poltergeist.

Originally posted by Yorick: Awesome. Thanks Moni. [img]smile.gif[/img]

You are very welcome [img]smile.gif[/img]
[img]graemlins/ladyhearts.gif[/img]

Hunter, you can save all that trouble by breaking wind

that would prove your existence to the person next to you

[John D Harris]

Wolfgir,
What purpose would the proof of my existance to another serve? I am what I am, let them prove their existance to me.