17 May 07
Originally posted by AThousandYoungAgreed. So long as 'they' does not include their body or anything physical about them. All you can say for absolute is that something (you) exists that is having thoughts and experiences. Nothing can be said for certain about the nature of that something.
The only thing anyone knows for sure is that they exist and their perceptions exist. That's it. Nothing else is certain.
Agree?
--- Penguin.
17 May 07
Originally posted by PenguinIs it correct to say that something non-physical like thought exists? Thought is made of information and information flow, so does all information exist? Does information have instances? does a thought you have today that you also had yesterday have only one existence or two?
Agreed. So long as 'they' does not include their body or anything physical about them. All you can say for absolute is that something (you) exists that is having thoughts and experiences. Nothing can be said for certain about the nature of that something.
--- Penguin.
17 May 07
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadQuite possibly not. Is there a philosopher in the house?
Is it correct to say that something non-physical like thought exists? Thought is made of information and information flow, so does all information exist? Does information have instances? does a thought you have today that you also had yesterday have only one existence or two?
I was essentially that all you can say is "I think, therefore I am" but I cannot say what I am.
I think you can say that thought exists. What you cannot say for sure is that anything physical exists. The entire 'physical' universe could just be simulated in some sort of software program for the benefit of my own conciousness (also part of the same software program).
--- Penguin.
17 May 07
1 edit
Originally posted by PenguinSo if a computer says "I think, therefore I am" then is it? Or must it actually think to do so? How does it know whether it is thinking or not? Is there a concrete definition of thought that can rule whether or not a pattern is complex enough to be able to declare that it exists?
Quite possibly not. Is there a philosopher in the house?
I was essentially that all you can say is "I think, therefore I am" but I cannot say [b]what I am.
I think you can say that thought exists. What you cannot say for sure is that anything physical exists. The entire 'physical' universe could just be simulated in some sort of software pro ...[text shortened]... the benefit of my own conciousness (also part of the same software program).
--- Penguin.[/b]
If you cant even be sure of anything other than "I am" then how do you know that you are thinking correctly and thus drawing the correct conclusion? Surely just by stating I am, you are sure that you are thinking, sure that you are thinking correctly and sure that you are capable of conceiving of a state of existence, thus you can be sure of more than just "I am".
[edit]
If thought can be said to exist then surely physical things also exist even if they are only simulations?
17 May 07
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIf you jump out of a jetliner at an altitude of 10000m without a parachute you will injure yourself. I know that and a lot of other stuff for sure.
The only thing anyone knows for sure is that they exist and their perceptions exist. That's it. Nothing else is certain.
Agree?