Skepticism

[Anonymous No.4808878]

Prove that you exist!

[Anonymous No.4808881]

I think, therefore I am.

[Anonymous No.4808890]

You read this.

[Anonymous No.4808893]

prove that you think, also prove that you read it

[Anonymous No.4808895]

>4808893

Prove proving is achievable.

[Anonymous No.4808897]

No, fuck you. I'm sick of this fucking bullshit.

[Anonymous No.4808903]

Define You. Define exist. Define proof.

[Anonymous No.4808913]

>>4808903
define exclamation mark

[Anonymous No.4808914]

>>4808903
>>4808903

THIS NIGGA

Took the words right out of my mouth, well done.

[Anonymous No.4808915]

you can't and you never will

[Anonymous No.4808916]

>>4808903
>>4808913
define define.

[Anonymous No.4808917]

define the definition of define

[Anonymous No.4808918]

>>4808881
this

[Anonymous No.4808927]

>>4808915
>implying will

[Anonymous No.4808933]

c...cogito ergo s..s.ssum?

right?

[Anonymous No.4808934]

define the

[Anonymous No.4808939]

>>4808916
State or describe exactly the nature, scope, or meaning of.
Give the meaning of (a word or phrase).

[Anonymous No.4808942]

>>4808878

not your personal laboratory

gtfo of /sci/ and go to /x/

[k00nch05 No.4808952]

Well according to descartian logic, and the fact that the human mind has 60k thoughts a day, I prove this without even posting. Why would you ask when this is already so evident?

[Anonymous No.4808958]

>implying implications
therefore I exist

[Anonymous No.4808972]

You can't. Get over it.

[Anonymous No.4808979]

>>4808972
of course he can't, he can't even properly define the terms of his question even when given the definition of define after he asked

[Anonymous No.4809002]

>>4808952
>tfw you know somebody in a meme image

[Anonymous No.4809048]

you can conceive of a system which i am a part of without causing a contradiction.

[Anonymous No.4809119]

I wish I didn't.

[Anonymous No.4809124]

>>4809002
>meme

Fuck off back to reddit.

[Anonymous No.4809125]

>>4808878
Done.

[God No.4809130]

>implying I exist

There's no fucking evidence. Stop believing in fairy tales, OP.

[Anonymous No.4809128]

>>4809124
Eh, I wasn't sure what to call it, an advice-dog style thing? I've only been to reddit once and it was awful and I never went back.

[Anonymous No.4809275]

I don't

[Anonymous No.4809291]

>>4809128
image macro

[Anonymous No.4809296]

think therefore i am, i cannot proove this to you and neither can you proove to me that you exist, but because it is the only productive thing to do, I will have to assume that everything around me actually exists.

[Anonymous No.4809329]

>2012
>still believes cartesian view is valid

[Language reform guy !KHn8YK/x0g No.4809338]

Who?

[Anonymous No.4809359]

You exist, don't you op? I exist. We all exist.

We're inside your head, all of this is a part of yourself.

[Anonymous No.4809363]

>>4808878
Couldn't have posted here if I didn't exist.
Unless god posted it of course.

[Anonymous No.4809512]

>>4808897
Sir, please use the proper forms

[Anonymous No.4809522]

The Julia sets exist, therefore this universe exists, therefore I exist.

[Anonymous No.4809531]

>>4808881
You dont exist unless there are thoughts.

I thought you'd know this by now. Rene descarte was a retard

[Anonymous No.4809536]

I actually don't know how to prove anything...

all I can do is use the conjunction my brain and my body to interact with the environment I am receiving through my five senses

Not even trolling op...

[Anonymous No.4811701]

>>4809536
This guy actually thinks he only only has five senses
>laughinggirls.png

[Anonymous No.4811717]

>>4811701
>This guy actually thinks he only only has five senses

Oh shut up. All the sense organs of our skin are collectively referred to as "touch", even if they are technically different senses. This is just a traditional term.

Also, balance and positional awareness are quasi-senses at best.

[Anonymous No.4811733]

>>4811717
Whatever, if you want to be that strict just to confirm your bias, then consider that smell is just a form of taste, but for smaller more spread out particles and hearing is just the sense of touch your ear gets from pressure vibrations, so you only have three senses.

[Anonymous No.4811966]

you can't without the 3 basal assumptions

[Anonymous No.4811972]

i can see myself in the mirror, and am typing this right now.

inb4 dumbass retorts about the intricacies and whatnot concerning the topic

no. based on what we perceive "existing" to be, i do in fact exist

[Anonymous No.4811977]

the feeling that i have right now of munching down hardcore on some pretzels and having them in my mouth
tldr qualia

[Anonymous No.4811985]

>thinks
>assumes there is a self
>not assuming there is only thoughts that generate the self
Why the fuck didnt the rest of the western world call this faggot out?

[Anonymous No.4811995]

I'll take the bait

How can you possibly criticize Descartes argument? I understand that the leap from "thinking" to "existence" requires justification (a premise), but how is it not self-evident that the consciousness doubting their existence must inherently exist to doubt it

[Anonymous No.4811996]

>>4809531
>You dont exist unless there are thoughts.
What does that even mean?

[Anonymous No.4811998]

>>4811985
because we only call out real faggots, aka you

faggot

[Anonymous No.4812002]

>>4811996
Means that without thoughts to relay "I exist" there is no such thing as "I". In the absence of "I" all there is are thoughts. In the absence of thoughts, there is no I found anywhere

[Anonymous No.4812006]

>>4811995
Correlation != causation. I thought everyone knew that. Just because there are thoughts doesn't mean there is a thinker. Just like there is a universe, doesnt mean there is a god creator.

[Anonymous No.4812005]

>>4811985
>>4812002
What generated those thoughts then?

[Anonymous No.4812008]

>>4812005
The brain? You didn't know that?

[Anonymous No.4812022]

>>4812008
But many brains exist that do not produce decipherable thoughts, so is it really the brain that generates thoughts or is it the mind and does a mind without a brain (ie AI) still exist?

[Anonymous No.4812023]

>>4812006
>Just like there is a universe, doesnt mean there is a god creator.
That doesn't mean the universe just poofed into existence. There could still be a cause we don't know about.

If cause and effect doesn't exist nothing would make any sense.

>>4812008
So the brain can generate those thoughts even though it doesn't exist?

[Anonymous No.4812024]

>>4812022
Brainless minds do not exist. Mind is just a conceptual framework that defines brain patterns. Mindless brain can exist, aka death.

[Anonymous No.4812028]

>>4811733
>so you only have three senses
Who gives a shit and how is this relevant at all?

[Anonymous No.4812029]

>>4812023
>So the brain can generate those thoughts even though it doesn't exist?
I guess "it" means "I". Yes. The brain can generate tons of imaginations/delusions.

[Anonymous No.4812040]

>>4812024
>Brainless minds do not exist.
I already gave the example of AI as a brainless mind, so are you saying AI does not exist or that the mind of an AI does not exist.

>Mindless brain can exist, aka death.
That is a nonfunctional brain though, what about lesser animals with properly functioning brains such as insects, fish, etc. Do they have a mind even though we can not interpret their thoughts and does that mind exist if it is incapable of relaying thought?

>Mind is just a conceptual framework that defines brain patterns.
But only a brain with a mind is capable of producing objective thought, so if existence relies on thought and the mind produces thought, then the mind is of higher existence than the brain even though it can not exist without a brain... how is this not a paradox.

[Anonymous No.4812041]

>>4812029
That doesn't make any sense. How can you have an effect without a cause?
I'm out.

[Anonymous No.4812044]

>>4812028
It was only relevant in showing how unrelevant >>4809536 and >>4811717 were

[Anonymous No.4812050]

>>4812006

So you agree that thoughts exist.

I'm not arguing one precedes another (unlike the creation argument which is easy to refute), I'm arguing that the thinker and the thoughts are equivalent. The thoughts--which you agree exist--are intrinsically defined as "I" in "I think"

[Anonymous No.4812048]

>>4812041
Maybe its the wrong cause? Instead of saying "I think therefore I am" maybe "I am because I think"

[Anonymous No.4812051]

>>4812044
You didn't disprove anything. You were just being nitpicky.

[Anonymous No.4812056]

>>4812050
Thoughts != Ii
Thoughts can create the notion of "I"

[Anonymous No.4812068]

>>4812050

"I" is much larger in scope than just the brain though and is certainly more than simply a thought relay mechanism for the brain and an entity that seems to engage in action (whether mindful or random) without expressing thoughts is still considered to exist where I come from, but what about things that can relay thought without the ability to engage in action (such as AI like cleverbot)?

[Anonymous No.4812069]

>>4812051
I never claimed to disprove anything, if anything I implied that I PROVED they were irrelevant, but apparently I didn't so are you saying that those posts were totally relevant?

[Anonymous No.4812076]

Sure, I'll prove that I exist, just as soon as you give a consistent, usable and meaningful definition of existence that's compatible with the everyday meaning of the word existence.

[Anonymous No.4812103]

>>4812076
have objective reality or being

[Anonymous No.4812117]

>>4812103
>definition by synonym
that fails the usability criterion

...faggot

[Anonymous No.4812120]

>>4812103
>objective reality
you materialist kids are funny

[Anonymous No.4812129]

>>4812117
http://thesaurus.com/browse/exist

Which word is a synonym for exist because none of those three words appear on this list or is it that you just don't understand what the word or means?

[Anonymous No.4812136]

>>4812120
Yes, dictionary manufacturers are known far and wide for their humor.

[Anonymous No.4812134]

>>4812129
be, you fucking retard
go kill yourself then try again

[Anonymous No.4812138]

>>4812134
Ok, so yea you just don't understand what the word or means.

[Anonymous No.4812142]

It's not that I exist that's debatable. The fact that I post is proof of my existence in itself.

Now, what IS debatable is my nature. Am I just a figment of imagination in OP's mind?

Is OP just the faggiest figment of my imagination?

[Anonymous No.4812144]

>>4812138
If you really think that's a useful definition, I have boundless contempt for you.

[Anonymous No.4812147]

>>4812142
>figment of imagination
>exists

[Anonymous No.4812149]

>>4812142
What if this is just a dream and I dreamt your response?
You didn't prove anything

[Anonymous No.4812156]

>>4812144
If you think you can do better than the professionals at Merriam-Webster's, then you should apply there and quit your job as a jizz mopper ASAP.

[Anonymous No.4812172]

>>4812142
>The fact that I post is proof of my existence in itself
Nope. There is no "you" posting. But rather a posting.

[Anonymous No.4812174]

>>4812144
If you think you are adding to the conversation by bitching about other people's thoughts without providing your own unique counter reasoning, then I have boundless contempt for you.

[Anonymous No.4812193]

i like wondering if my own consciousness is the only thing there is, and everyone else is just made up for my senses to perceive. but it's pretty egotistical to really believe that that's the case.

[Anonymous No.4812199]

>>4812193
What if your conciousness isn't your own? And if you aren't real either?
What if you die every time a thought ends and are reborn when one is made?

[Anonymous No.4812202]

>>4812199
heavy man, heavy.

[Anonymous No.4812207]

>>4812172
Sure there is. Even if the post is imagined, the post still has a poster, it's just you, so in that case I exist, as you.

Which is understandable since philosophy is masturbation, as the logic loop demonstrates.

[Anonymous No.4812218]

>>4811977
:O
You're me from the past

[Anonymous No.4812223]

>>4812207
>i exist because of my post
>my post exist because i exist to experience it
sounds like circular reasoning to me

[Anonymous No.4812225]

>>4812223
Goedel motherfucker, do you speak it?
You can't prove a perfect system

[Anonymous No.4812240]

>>4812225
Actually the only thing that proves is there is a thought that is being transferred. Thinker/I seems to be invisible.

[Anonymous No.4812280]

What does it matter whether we exist or not? If we can't ever prove it then it's not worth asking the question, as whatever our premise ("yes I exist" or "no I do not exist"), all things will remain the same.

[Anonymous No.4812299]

/sci/ - Philosophy & Humanities

[Anonymous No.4812301]

>>4812240
So when you are alone in your basement with your thoughts, you are unsure of your existence?

[Anonymous No.4812311]

>>4812240
but if i don't know if i exist there is no way i can be sure you exist.
or, we know we exist because here i fucking am and overthinking it is retarded.
descartes did a lot of great things, but philosophy wasn't one of them.

[Anonymous No.4812369]

>>4808952

>Well according to descartian logic
>descartian logic
>descartian

[Anonymous No.4812398]

>hurr
>durr
I define whatever this thing I'm experiencing as existence, therefore I exist by definition, in my own mind anyway.

[Anonymous No.4812420]

>>4812398
>implying the very definition of existence doesn't call for an objective reality that can be verified by other members of existence
>implying anyone currently living defined existence rather than just being told they existed when they were introduced to the external concept of existence