Do I exist or don’t I?

If I claim “I don’t exist” then I must be a LIAR therefore.Surely?

I clearly can’t make any claim if I don’t exist.

Therefore,if I do make a claim I must exist to be able to make it.

So if I claim that I don’t exist then I must be mistaken or a LIAR.

What other explanation is there?

Do simulations exist or not?

I would suggest that simulations exist yes.

Who's asking though Bobsul, if you don't exist to ask it?

It is not the question whether you do or do not exist you should be posing rather what are you and whom are you being?

Personally I don't know my origin and that is good on itself, it is what it should be. Simulated non simulated, none of that matters...I won't feel any different tomorrow one way or another.

If Shakespeare was a demi-god and wrote us all in a grand play I would still be happy with my prescribed phenomenology whatever was the case...no more or less real then I ever wanted to be...no more or less complex than I could ever aspire to be.

Whatever I am in spacetime, the most contingent being in existence, or an old forgotten God of my own realm, I AM!

But you are not "I AM" if you don't exist Albuquerque.

How can you claim something if you don't exist to claim it? How can you claim anything at all?

It would appear you want it both ways.

It is not your contingent origin that proves or disproves you...

But that isn't the point.

The point is that one must exist to make any claim.

One cannot say one doesn't exist therefore.

it is patently obvious the question itself is enough to assert you exist...you do not even require an answer and that was my point.

Lets say you were a cartoon in someone else imagination. Haven't you ever heard from creators that cartoons have a life of their own? They often, in their creative process mumble things to themselves such as Calvin would never say that...Calvin rather say X or Y...where is Calvin? Does it belong to the mind that is writing him?

But the mind that is writing him must only write about what is possible to be written about a cartoon...and whatever the mind stumbles upon can only be whatever the world found useful to be written about...so I ask you again is Calvin less of a cartoon then he was the day before? Do you think he is less real then an atom you or me?

Plato would argue that Calvin was found by reminiscence...he was always there at home in the newspaper...

Plato had to exist to be able to argue anything at all. So he existed. So he couldn't claim that he didn't exist. So lets put that one to bed.

As to the substance of existence and the nature of consciousness and the mind.
I would suggest that that is the next big step for philosophy and science and I would suggest that present philosophical and scientific theories are in error and in real trouble.

Wow you managed to misread the whole thing, congrats!

I haven't misread the whole thing at all. I know what you are trying to say. The issue is, I would suggest, is that the science you also believe in does not concur with your reasoning.

I know all about dualistic robotic reasoning as a possible option for explaining existence.

I also accept tri-theistic reasoning as a possibility for explaining existence as well because it concurs with the science that I believe is correct for explaining the cosmos.

I would suggest that the only way to escape dualistic robotic reasoning which has both a 0 and 1 on both sides of the fence is if one progresses to tri-theistic reasoning,however, I would also suggest that you need to know about and be persuaded by the sound science thats backs it up,which,I would also suggest is becoming easier and easier as we see modern day scientific theories failing by observation.



.

I say you don't exist. You're just a figment of my imagination. And now you're on 'ignore' so you really don't exist.

How can you claim that if you don’t exist? You are lying to yourself.

Dualism is robotic.

The robotic side of our nature has control over us.

Until that is,we take control of it.

If we ever do that is.

Robots exist, but that’s about it.

I would suggest that with robotic dualistic reasoning there is the I EXIST,I DON’T EXIST claim on both sides of the fence because I would suggest that you require a 0 and 1 on both sides of the fence for 0,0…0,1…1,0…1,1 logic processing which results in the automated part of our make up reaching contradictory conclusions,.

It would appear that the the AUTOMATED part of our make up, can’t make its mind up whether it exists or not and therefore has a bit of an identity crisis on its hands.

Personally, I have learnt to separate myself from the automated part of my make up.

I would suggest that it is important to separate ourselves from the automated part of our make up.

I would suggest that it is possible to exists but not exist if you are robot.

Hence the automated part of our make up which claims it exists and doesn’t exist as it processes contradictory data between the dualistic fence.

There are two equal but opposite electromagnetic forces in nature which do not cancel out but rather vibratory balance due to -/-…-/+…+/-…..+/+ logic.

Observations confirm that everything vibrates in nature.

The present scientific explanations as to why vibration happens in nature is not correct in my opinion because it does not explain the philosophical or psychological workings or experiences.

Balanced electromagnetic forces cause the vibration in the cosmos even at the consciousness level and therefore can be definitively confirmed not by observation but rather by personal experience.

The automated part of our make up is accurate in its assessment I would suggest because it is only the automated part of our make up which clearly does exist but doesn’t exist if it isn’t alive.