igm
 
  1  
Mon 17 Oct, 2011 11:43 am
@JPLosman0711,
JPLosman0711 wrote:

There really is no 'mind'...

The brain is an object created by color (a brain surgeon sees a colored object in his subjective reality and not a truly existent 'thing in itself' out there in physical reality . Color cannot be found in the physical world but is experienced by each of us but one person's experience of color cannot be experienced by anyone else. Where is this subjective reality if it's physical then it will appear as various colors but colors are subjective phenomena?
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Mon 17 Oct, 2011 02:00 pm
@igm,
Explanation after explanation after explanation!!!

Explaining does nothing but put 'you' in a 'dizzying cycle' with the majority of the people on the planet.

'Mind' and 'brain' are both concepts that have yet to be proven.

The explanations that 'you' and the rest of the planet are using do nothing but entangle your 'self' in a whole bunch of 'whoopla' that doesn't exist but is a very 'real' illusion.
igm
 
  1  
Mon 17 Oct, 2011 03:03 pm
@JPLosman0711,
JPLosman0711 wrote:

Explanation after explanation after explanation!!!

Explaining does nothing but put 'you' in a 'dizzying cycle' with the majority of the people on the planet.

'Mind' and 'brain' are both concepts that have yet to be proven.

The explanations that 'you' and the rest of the planet are using do nothing but entangle your 'self' in a whole bunch of 'whoopla' that doesn't exist but is a very 'real' illusion.

Not if it's used deconstructively whilst keeping in mind the relative nature of the linguist tool being used i.e. in order to 'go beyond' and find the 'wordless' bedrock of reality.
Procrustes
 
  1  
Tue 18 Oct, 2011 12:02 am
@JPLosman0711,
Quote:
The explanations that 'you' and the rest of the planet are using do nothing but entangle your 'self' in a whole bunch of 'whoopla' that doesn't exist but is a very 'real' illusion.


This makes it sound like you are distancing yourself from the planet or consider yourself not even in a category of anything. I agree that this world can be percieved as 'illusory' but let me give you an example: when you go to the shops and buy some milk, do you act like it's all an illusion (however one may act to this notion) or do you maintain a 'performance' even with an understanding that all concepts don't exist but yet 'you' still 'play along' with 'others' in 'conceptual contexts'?
guigus
 
  1  
Tue 18 Oct, 2011 07:24 am
@smcmonagle,
smcmonagle wrote:

Nothing can exist so long as we agree on it non existing. Its just a word our language needed to employ to explain something. And that something is nothing. We need to define "nothing" and if we agree on the definition then we agree it exists. Question. "whats in that cup"? answer >>"nothing". You look in the glass and agree. Then nothing exists in that empty cup and therefore nothing exists


The sentence "nothing can exist" means that everything is impossible, which is absurd: you are just confusing the word with its meaning--which you are not the first to do. The word "nothing" is not "just a word," it is also a concept. Neither any other word is "just a word," or it ceases to be a word to become noise.
0 Replies
 
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Tue 18 Oct, 2011 10:11 am
@Procrustes,
There is no 'you' that could ever be 'distanced'(or not distanced) from the 'planet', nor could 'you' ever be 'shoe-horned' into any 'category'.

If you really 'agreed'(understood) with what I was saying then you wouldn't 'fall back' on your own definable, explainable and provable presuppositions/conclusions.

While I did enjoy reading your 'analogy', I have a feeling you're looking for 'counter-proof' to play-patty-cake with.

You are the incessant conversation taking place between 'you' and your 'self'.

See, there 'really' is only your 'self', the 'you' is the illusion(fun) part.
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Tue 18 Oct, 2011 10:12 am
@igm,
Your last post was a bunch of 'nothing' of the top of your head.

igm
 
  1  
Tue 18 Oct, 2011 11:07 am
@JPLosman0711,
Not to me... are you sure it wasn't over the top of your head? My reply to your post was in the spirit of said post.
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Tue 18 Oct, 2011 11:12 am
@igm,
There simply 'isn't' any of 'that-which' you posted.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Tue 18 Oct, 2011 05:59 pm
Quote:
DOES NOTHING EXIST???
Clinton 'd tell us that depends on what the definition of IS is.
0 Replies
 
kulanabrian
 
  1  
Tue 18 Oct, 2011 07:10 pm
@mark noble,
Great question - I've been struggling with that one for most of my life.

Check up. If you stand in the hot sun....does your head burn? Is that an illusion?

Go to the physical library nearby - preferably the reference section - read about string theory, relativity, integral calculus etc - briefly of course

If nothing exists - did I/you dream it all up that material up - this would be fantastic/unbelievable.

Did I design that elegant bridge in my nothing dream.

Enough for now.
Brian
0 Replies
 
Procrustes
 
  1  
Wed 19 Oct, 2011 05:56 am
@JPLosman0711,
I don't know if there is proof, for if there was, it would prove that that proof is not the proof at all. I get what your saying about 'the self', and not really looking for any 'counter proof', but what you seem to be doing is also what you are accusing me of doing; which is falling back on 'definations'. You've been telling me something that isn't new to me. No matter how you justify reality (illusory and all), reality seemingly draws you back. My point is that 'agreed/understood' or not, people will have their own take on this question and the very nature of it is paradoxical, whether you agree on the 'term' 'paradox' or not, or even if these terms are 'constructs' made by humans that don't get to the crux of what it IS. A person once said to me,"Never shove the horses face into the water to make it drink."
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Wed 19 Oct, 2011 10:07 am
@Procrustes,
Most of your post is just a bunch of 'spinning in circles'.

There are no definitions, what 'you' call definitions are combinations of characteristics(concepts) used to prove the existence of the one who 'put them together' through the agreement of others.

I was referreng to 'your' reliance on what is called 'definition', treating them as some 'thing' that somehow exists outside of 'you' to prove a 'point'(excuse not to move off your own ground).

I am not talking about the term 'paradoxical'. I am talking about 'what' the word 'paradoxical' points to which is the lack of an ability to come up with an explanation that's 'good enough' to get the other people on the planet to agree with you.

It's you that 'draws you back', you 'act in accordance' with the others so that you will not have to 'be' in a way that is 'un-pleasant' or whatever other label you have subscribed to.

You're never ging to 'get' anywhere other than where billions of 'humans' have already been if you keep using the same explanations.
Procrustes
 
  1  
Thu 20 Oct, 2011 04:03 am
@JPLosman0711,
Quote:
I was referreng to 'your' reliance on what is called 'definition', treating them as some 'thing' that somehow exists outside of 'you' to prove a 'point'(excuse not to move off your own ground).


'You' are doing the same thing... I could pick a term, say how 'you' use the word 'exists' and say there is no such thing, only the agreement of the word by others. 'I' got that a long time ago, but 'you' obviously don't see how 'you' rely on this agreement as much as anyone in this forum, this makes what 'you' say as much a reflection on 'yourself' as it is on 'me'. . But of course 'you' are 'no thing'. So congrats 'you' 'win'.

Quote:
I am talking about 'what' the word 'paradoxical' points to which is the lack of an ability to come up with an explanation that's 'good enough' to get the other people on the planet to agree with you.


When has a single country agreed on any one thing, let alone a complex question such as this threads one? 'I've' never wanted to make people agree with what 'I' say; just provoke some thought. Make of it what 'you' will..
SynnGrim
 
  1  
Thu 20 Oct, 2011 02:11 pm
@mark noble,
Quote:
In your opinion - does nothing exist, has it ever existed, can it ever exist?


If by nothing you mean a space holding no particles or matter what so ever, Than I think it's possible, not likely though. But obviously in the other context you likely meant I would say no. What we logically perceive to exist, I feel, exists. Otherwise we would not be here to discuss this debate, which also exists.
0 Replies
 
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Fri 21 Oct, 2011 12:21 pm
@Procrustes,
The problem with people like you is while you are 'provocative' thinkers, you only do it for the sake of 'reaping the rewards'(hearing others tell you that you are a 'deep' thinker).

This only allows your 'self' to go as far as 'they' will let you.

Until you finally 'admit' that you don't know what you're talking about your existence on the planet will be defined by this circling 'back and forth' between possibilities and never knowing the actuality of who you really are.

Stop trying to make me think you 'are' one way or another, there really is no 'me' here. It's all you, Be-ing.
Procrustes
 
  1  
Sat 22 Oct, 2011 05:34 pm
@JPLosman0711,
Honestly, I have no idea what you are on about anymore and I don't care.

Who can honestly say they know what they are going on about with truthful clarity? I certainly don't say that I do. All I do is leave an impression for people to make of it what they will. And who I am is my own journey of self discovery, as with anyone else. Who can truly say who they really are? And even if I knew, I would still exercise doubt and say that was not the reason for who I am.

I don't want to hear people to say I'm a deep thinker or anything for that matter. That is not why I provoke discussion. The only rewards I get from this website is to learn. I don't want to debate over semantics. Fresh ideas are what interest me most; unfriendly people and those who assume things on others don't.

JPLosman, you have an interesting take on who you think we are and it has definately made me think about it more than I would like to. But I get the 'gist' of it and have for quite some time now, and now I want to move on. I honestly don't care anymore. I'd rather focus on the threads question.
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Sun 23 Oct, 2011 07:30 am
@Procrustes,
Don't come to the conclusion of 'giving up' or 'not caring'.

Get curious as to why you no longer have any way of 'explaining' the 'ground' you are standing on!!

A 'conclusion' is the place you come to when you want an excuse to stop thinking and provide a 'way out'.

There is no way out!! The task of thinking is yours alone, nobody can do it for you!!
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Sun 23 Oct, 2011 06:36 pm
Nothing exists.

Think about it.
0 Replies
 
Procrustes
 
  1  
Sun 23 Oct, 2011 11:27 pm
@JPLosman0711,
Sounds like you are wanting to think for me... LOL!

I have no idea about this 'way out' business. Infinite possibilites often keeps my head absorbed with infinite info. I can't explain truly why I'm blessed with this miracle of life or why I'm standing on this ground, can you?

I am curious, but I tire of you trying to tell me stuff I've already thought of before.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/15/2025 at 05:54:49