Genes? — Agent Smith
Nonphysicalism hanging by a thread. It's the last stand. Do or die! — Agent Smith
Why is it a false assumption. It's proven that genes are the determiners of our physical makeup. We use genes? — Agent Smith
The outside world is as private (public) as the inside world is public (private). Both are as public as private. Mutually knibbling, gnawing, and biting each other. — EugeneW
That's sort of what I mean by 'mound' and 'mutter.' This has 'mind' contaminated with stuffishness and 'matter' contaminated with language (mindish stuff.) — lll
Thinking about someone you haven't seen in years showing up around the corner
— EugeneW
:lol: — Agent Smith
Coin or con? — EugeneW
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cwrJelMk5e4... There will never be another one
Like you
There will never be another one
Who can
Do the things you do, oh ...
I'm working lately at an experimental prose style that is dense with suggestiveness. — lll
Now you just need to show me a correlation, except that one side of that correlation is...private and impossible to show by definition. Do you see it ?
Note that I do not dispute that you can fish for correlations between different kinds of public entities. But it's nonsense to speak of mathematically linking public entities to 'ghosts' that defined precisely as that which can never be made manifest to others.
Think of it this way : a scientist says...listen fellows, so there's this stuff that only I can see and ... clearly there's a relationship of this only-I-can-see-stuff with the peanut butter consumption in Minneapolis.
The temptation is to derive synchronization of sign use from synchronization of qualia, but I find it more plausible to derive the intuition that qualia are synchronized from the synchronization of sign use. Consider the movie Her. Folks will fall in love with operating systems soon enough, simply because the sweet talk will sweet enough. — lll
1. Dreams – Almost everyone, if not all, claims that they dream. We accept this claim without requiring proof. We use our own experience of dreaming to validate the other person’s claim of dream. — L'éléphant
2. Pain – We do not have proof of pain except our own complaint and expression of pain. Doctors have to ask where it hurts because there isn’t a proof that they could point to. — L'éléphant
3. Fear –It’s a very subjective feeling that has side effects such as sweating, fast heart-beat, sweaty palms, but fear cannot be proven by pointing to these outward signs because these signs can also be present for reasons other than fear. — L'éléphant
4. Floaters—these are what you see in front of you when you experience “floaters” small dark shapes that float across your vision. There is no proof of their existence except for what you report to other people. — L'éléphant
Were they not, if they were even slightly different, society as we know it would collapse. — Agent Smith
So then why is it often required of belief in god that a proof be produced, when we do have other claims, equally important, such pain and fear, which we don't need a proof? Is it because a belief in god is something taught to us? While pain and fear and dreams just come to us naturally since we're babies? What is it about belief in god, even sensation of holy ghost that is so out of this world that it requires proof?What I wanted to say but didn't now becomes relevant. A person has a religious experience and tells himself he had a one-to-one with God. The religious experience itself can't be denied, it is true and there's no need for proof.
We have to prove that some things need no proof. The reality of a sensation/experience doesn't need an argument, it needs no justification. How do we do that? Looks like the JTB theory of knowledge needs an overhaul. I have no idea how to do that. — Agent Smith
So I think this is the gist of the issue -- belief in god is tied with religion. It is necessary that religion is involved. That's why atheists want proof. Because belief in god can never be treated like how we treat self-evident pain, fear, and dreams.That depends on how a particular society treats religion. — lll
Good points!Well, I guess an idealist would argue that everything we see, we take for granted as real when it is actually a product of mind. Does that count?
When we see people walking down the road, we take it for granted that they are real. What if only 50% of them are real and the rest spectres?
For me the question sometimes might be: what is it we have reason to doubt? Not so much what is it we don't have proof for. — Tom Storm
That's not proof.If you hear people talking in their sleep you have proof of the dreaming. Likewise for animals. You might even put me under a brain-scanning machine. Then you could see if I dream when asleep. What proof do you need more? Are you a solipsist? — EugeneW
haha! Good one! That does not require proof!5. That my wife is right. — Benkei
That's what I'm saying -- my justification for the truth of my dream is your own experience, and vice versa. Are you not seeing the issue with this? There is no group of anti-dreams who calls us out on our bullshit dreams. No one.How is this not proof? If I stated, "When I sleep, I have experiences", then if I others say, "Oh yeah, I have that too", that's proof/evidence. If not one but one person in the world had experiences when they slept, then I think you would be right. Even then, brains have been scanned during sleep, and a lot of activity is found in there.To be fair to your argument, perhaps what you meant was more along the lines of "What we specifically dreamed of". — Philosophim
This is not a proof. Doctors could only infer from our reports of pain -- but there's no thing that is called pain. It's not like a tumor, where there is concrete evidence of it. Medications work on pain, through trials and studies of subjects who report which pain medication eases their pain the best. Evidence is what you're thinking of. Trial and error is not proof. And so on.Further, we have medication that eases pain. If we didn't have evidence or proof of pain, then pain medication would be no better than a placebo.
Perhaps again, we don't have proof of your personal experience of what pain feels like. But that doesn't negate the proof that pain exists in people, and has very real physical impact on the brain and body. — Philosophim
They are real. I think my OP implied that. We do accept them as true. What we can't really show the floaters to others. Only accounts of people who've experienced them.↪L'éléphant
Just a minor point of correction here. Floaters are real. — EricH
If you hear people talking in their sleep you have proof of the dreaming. Likewise for animals. You might even put me under a brain-scanning machine. Then you could see if I dream when asleep. What proof do you need more? Are you a solipsist?
— EugeneW
That's not proof.
No, I'm not a solipsist. — L'éléphant
I don't need to prove to myself I'm awake. But the question is, do you want me to prove to you I'm awake right now? So, my rebuttal is, why? What is your reason for asking? If I told you I had a dream last night and you responded by saying you don't believe me, the conversation stops right there.Do you have proof you are awake? You mean that you can never proof pain? — EugeneW
What is your reason for asking? — L'éléphant
That's the thing -- I don't need to prove to you I'm awake.You might say you are awake but what if I say that I don't believe you? — EugeneW
You might say you are awake but what if I say that I don't believe you? The fact that you say it is no proof. How can I know you are awake like me? — EugeneW
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.