You Can't Prove You Exist
You can't prove to me that you exist. Don't even bother, it's impossible.
You can't prove I don't.
It's generally assumed that you do. I'm questioning that assumption, not commenting on the chances that the opposite is true.
Don't even bother
OK
By acknowledging your attempt
not to bother, you implicitly legitimze your subconscious desire
to bother.
An eccentric philosophy professor gave a one question final
exam after an entire semester dealing with a broad array of
topics.
The class was already seated and ready to go when the
professor picked up his chair, plopped it on his desk and
wrote on the board: "Using everything we have learned this
semester, prove that this chair does not exist."
Fingers flew, erasers erased, notebooks were filled in furious
fashion. Some students wrote over 30 pages in one hour
attempting to refute the existence of the chair.
One member of the class however, was up and finished in
less than a minute.
Weeks later when the grades were posted, the rest of the
group wondered how he could have gotten an A when he had
barely written anything at all.
They found his answer consisted of two words: "What chair?"
By acknowledging your attempt not to bother, you implicitly legitimze your subconscious desire to bother.
You said "don't even bother" not "don't want to bother." Part of me wants to bother, but I see the futility, so I won't bother.
Oh, and who's words are you reading right now?
[SIZE="1"]Shit! I attempted to convince you I exist. Damnit![/SIZE]You can't prove to me that you exist. Don't even bother, it's impossible.
To whom are you addressing this?
I can prove I exist, but only to myself, not to you.
In fact, it is the only provable thing there is.
To whom are you addressing this?
Well, I'm the only one present. If my boss walks in, this window goes away.
And yet you keep talking to me.
You keep creating those threads.
You keep listening for me to reply.
Your refusal to accept the proof does not negate the proof.
Besides, I don't exist. How's that possible?
I am neither talking nor listening.
I can prove I exist, but only to myself, not to you.
In fact, it is the only provable thing there is.
I wrote and erased a reply saying basically that proof itself is delusion. You seem to feel otherwise. How does one go about proving one's own existance.
Does proof require a concrete statement of the conditions that are to be met, therefore a total knowledge of the subject under consideration, therefore an impossible omniscience; in other words, is proof impossible? If we attempt proof of a limited data set, do we ignore the interrelationships it has with it's surroundings?
I wrote and erased a reply saying basically that proof itself is delusion. You seem to feel otherwise. How does one go about proving one's own existance.
If existance is a delusion, then I am the deluded thing.
"Proof" simply means you haven't seen the exception. And since you can't prove there isn't an exception then you can't prove anything.
SNIP...I am the deluded thing...SNIP
"Proof" simply means you haven't seen the exception. And since you can't prove there isn't an exception then you can't prove anything.
An exception to what?
An exception to what?
To what you are trying to prove. Evidence to the contrary in other words.
There isn't really any possible exception to "cogito, ergo sum". Unfortunately, there also isn't anything else that can be concluded using it.
By acknowledging your attempt not to bother, you implicitly legitimze your subconscious desire to bother.
how . . . clever . . . of you to create a thread to which any response can be slammed down. :eyebrow:
You can't prove to me that you exist. Don't even bother, it's impossible.
No, but I can prove to me that you don't exist. That's all that matters.
... how . . . clever . . . of you ...
What is it of you to comment on it? More clever than me? Okay, you win. Hands down.
"What is it of you?" I have no idea what that means. Or why I win. I think you do, cause, you know--it was clever!
. . . and also a bit mean.
and I was going to make a sex comment, along the lines of if we were having sex you'd know I was real . . .
but then I thought--but he could be thinking of Angelina Jolie at the time.
. . . so I didn't! :)
I am so confident about that.....I had to do this
This is a Far Side cartoon, isn't it? Or at least something from the golden days of the New Yorker?
You all know the one, right ... blackboard full of equations, chalk falling to the floor, another scientist looking guy comes into the panel and says something like "My God, Johnson finally proved he doesn't exist!"
I don't think any computer program can be as successful in fledging full out responses, threads, emotions and substance that Dwellars crank out on a daily basis. We all exist whether we want to believe it or not.
Computer program? Let's start at the top. My eyes absorb some radiation and it gets converted into a neurochemical phantom... where? ...inside my head. Oh. Actually all I have to go by is inside my head, I can't even count on the eyes, the radiation, or the assumption that I'm even looking at a computer screen; much less that anything, even a computer program, is making the pixels (do pixels exist?) change configuration.
You lost me at the top.
[SIZE="1"]Come back and get me![/SIZE]
you are so weird, Flint. (but that's okay, since I love weird)
I hope ultra-facility isn't important to my expression . . .
since I have no idea wtf it means.
You read my signature! Bozzio is an ex Zappa drummer.That quote is from an interview in Modern Drummer, and the bonus is that he references Joseph Campbell. It's like all my favorite things at once. ... . . . I know it's a little longish and I always wonder if anybody ever actualy reads it.
Yes... "follow your bliss" ...
the bills i get in the mail say i exist - my birth certificate says i exist, but if i had a death certificate i wouldn't exist
computers don't follow their bliss. I posit that it's JOY that proves you are alive.
It's not about computers versus people. But if it were, I would ask you if you are composed of materials which must obey the laws of physics.
I would ask you if you are composed of materials which must obey the laws of physics.
only partially
"Luminous beings we are, not this crude matter."
(pinches self)
OW!
Now, see what you made me do!
I'm real, I'm real, I'm a real boy!
. . . er, girl.
What else are you made of? Energy which must also obey the laws of physics, or something else?
Oh, and what is that? ...is it made of magic fairy dust?
Which reminds me of the funniest song I heard today:
But fortunately
I have the key
To escape reality
You may see me tonight with an illegal smile
It don't cost very much, but it lasts a long while
Won't you please tell "the man" I didn't kill anyone
No I'm just tryin to have me some fun
people are more than physical matter, cells and blood, organs and skin.
joy is my personal word for that More. We were just talking about bliss. Yoda uses the Force. If you believe in religion, maybe it's the soul. It's the feeling you get when you heart swells at a beautiful sunrise, or you dance yourself to trance. It's the More of human experience.
people are more than physical matter, cells and blood, organs and skin. ...
And what else, specifically, are they made of? Unless we are to believe that human beings, of all things in the universe, are endowed with some magical property, then we have to conclude that we are made of whatever everything else is made of. If there is some magic in us, it just goes back to being defined as a physical property of the universe. Unless we, of all things that exist, are favored with some special supernatural quality.
Don't know that humans have the exclusive claim to the More. I only know I experience it.
Maybe it's YOU that doesn't exist.
For the record, The Force that they refer to in Star Wars? I believe in it literally. And on that note, the Joseph Cambell/Bill Moyers interviews were filmed at Skywalker Ranch. Campbell credits Star Wars as being a valid modern source. The Force is real, I just don't think it's "supernatural" ... There is one nature; whether we fully understand it or not has no bearing on whether it can violate it's own laws. We are physical objects, whatever that is.
I know all that, and I tend to agree. We are a tribe of two.
Ah. Now we're getting somewhere. Go back and pick up freshnesschronic!
well, I would say I don't do threesomes . . .
but I'd be lying!
This thread just keeps getting better and better!
every day
in every way
it's getting better and better
The Force is real, I just don't think it's "supernatural" ...
Of course not. It's made out of Midichlorian excretions.
Yea..solipsistic- the only thing I like to prove is my own existence.
As for my tattoo- it's right above my smelly arm-pit for effect.
tattoo? wha . . . ?
hmmm......could it be somewhere in this very same thread? Nah.
I don't see any tattoo, and trust me, my attention is immediately riveted when someone talks about body art.
I know! it's one of those things I can't see. You guys must think I'm completely bat-fucking-blind!
I don't see any tattoo, and trust me, my attention is immediately riveted when someone talks about body art.
I know! it's one of those things I can't see. You guys must think I'm completely bat-fucking-blind!
pg. 2..................(the photo)
and to think that i went to all that trouble....
what photo? There's no photos in this thread.
are you pulling my leg?
what photo? There's no photos in this thread.
are you pulling my leg?
Pg. 2 #27
yep, now I see it. My page two is different.
are you in IAMBME by any chance?
We're just a collective figment of someones very bored imagination.
I'm ok with that. Are you?
yep, now I see it. My page two is different.
are you in IAMBME by any chance?
No...not even sure what that is. Body modification group?
yeah. a HUGE and very early social networking site for us modded folks. It was just the combination of tattoo+IAM that made me think of it.
Cartesian theory has a lot of implications for body modification btw.
It's not about computers versus people. But if it were, I would ask you if you are composed of materials which must obey the laws of physics.
I don't know, no one does, yet.
Flint
who is 'YOU' Define the word 'YOU'
what would the proof be? Define 'proof'
what kind of existence? Define Exist?
You can't set any mesurable paramiters so people can't create a profile.
Don't even try. Don't even bother.
I didn't ask me to do it, I asked you to do it.
Actually I asked you not to do it, so, by default, you didn't even have to say anything.
But you did. Why? What devious motivation are you hiding up your sleeve? You're toying with me; pulling me into a trap, which, once sprung, will crush my feeble musings in the cruel jaws of your bone-crushing intellect! I'm not falling for that, no way. I reject your challenge! :::mumble mumble:::
You only exist until I exit from this forum. Then you no longer exist. Not in my life anyway.
I didn't ask me to do it, I asked you to do it.
Actually I asked you not to do it, so, by default, you didn't even have to say anything.
But you did. Why? What devious motivation are you hiding up your sleeve? You're toying with me; pulling me into a trap, which, once sprung, will crush my feeble musings in the cruel jaws of your bone-crushing intellect! I'm not falling for that, no way. I reject your challenge! :::mumble mumble:::
rats
Who ate all that salad?
rats?
yeah. a HUGE and very early social networking site for us modded folks. It was just the combination of tattoo+IAM that made me think of it.
Cartesian theory has a lot of implications for body modification btw.
Really? How so?
Cartesian theory emphasizes mind over body--the pureness of intellect over the grossness of the body. This philosophy is a direct descendant of classical thinking, and it's what causes some people in Western Civilization to cry "mutilation" when confronted with body modification. But other cultures view the body quite differently, hence the "modern tribal" movement associated with body modification.
Cartesian theory emphasizes mind over body--the pureness of intellect over the grossness of the body. This philosophy is a direct descendant of classical thinking, and it's what causes some people in Western Civilization to cry "mutilation" when confronted with body modification. But other cultures view the body quite differently, hence the "modern tribal" movement associated with body modification.
Ok .....well if people in western civilization believe in Cartesian Philosophy and as you say "grossness of the body", which I have never heard an ancient say pertaining to this philosophy, what would be wrong with modification or mutilation?
In short.... this isn't adding up to me. Could you please clarify this for me?
Odd that this should come up in the "you can't prove you exist" thread, because one of the motivations, I think, that people have (among the legion) for body modification is just that--to prove to themselves that they exist, to reinforce the envelope of the body with meaning.
It's a tension between western society and history, and non-western society. The Greek ideal was of bodily perfection; furthered by the medieval Christian church's horror of imperfection and abnormaility, and by the Enlightenment philosophers, such as Decartes. "Civilization" in the Western view is the triumph of man over nature, but we are moving away from that.
Here is what Victoria Pitts, a scholar and the author of "In the Flesh" says:
"Among the problems of the self-mutiliation argument is that it uncritically relies on a classical ideal of the skin as a pristine, smooth, closed envelope for the self, and a notion of the body and self as fixed and unchanging. These notions were inherited from Enlightenment traditions . . The Enlightenment affirmed a mind/body binary in which the mind was seen as more significant, while the body was dismissed as a hindrance to [I]res cogitans, Decartes' term for the intellect and selfhood." [/I]
Opening the body in the form of pricking it with a needle goes against this Western idea of bodily boundaries. In tribal societies, both ancient and modern, this legacy is obviously lacking, and marking the body carries with it a whole slew of meanings, from status symbols to rites of passage, to marks of humanity.
If you are a Westerner, if you mark your body, you are mutilating it. You are demonstrating your disdain for traditional norms and are likely to be viewed as dangerous, criminal, sexually, deviant or psychologically disturbed. Some of these views are changing, of course, but try getting medical or dental treatment if you are heavily modded and see how lingering these ideas can be.
I hope I've added to your understanding. It's really a pretty complex question, and I certainly do not consider myself any kind of classical or Enlightenment scholar. I can recommend a number of good books if you are interested in body modification or philosophy of the human body.
Actually I can, I have a religion that worships me.
Odd that this should come up in the "you can't prove you exist" thread, because one of the motivations, I think, that people have (among the legion) for body modification is just that--to prove to themselves that they exist, to reinforce the envelope of the body with meaning.
To reinforce the body with meaning isn't the same as wanting to prove one exists. This is far reaching. Are you going to tell anyone you exist because you have a tatoo? I hope not. I think we are smarter than cave me.
It's early am so I googled my assumption.
This is what I found.
http://www.umm.maine.edu/resources/beharchive/beh450/CatBartash/psych.htm
There is no one reason why some one would want to participate in body modification. Here is a list of some of the more common reasons why:
Protection , Exhibitionism
Sexuality , Aesthetics
Identification , Fighting Societal Norms
Pain (masochists) , Trend
Sign of Loyalty , Distinction
Shock Value , Emulation
I've been thinking of having my tatoo removed. To use your reasoning in reverse would mean I want to take away the reinforcement that I exist.
It's not logical sorry.
you may be right, but body modification is often not "logical"--it's not really something you do with your mind as the primary force behind it
You missed my point but it dosn't matter. I understand where you are comming from and what you are saying.
Yeah, I'm with skysidhe. I understand what you are saying. I just don't think you get what I've been saying....maybe you're just skimming and not really reading or something. Especially since you are trying to hand me a list of reading material. Well, thanks for the info.
well, I have two people accusing me of ignoring them, which surprises me, because I thought I made an informative and thoughtful post.
My statement relating body modification to proving one's existence to myself is opinion only--just what struck me as I read the thread, and I don't have anything other than my personal feelings to back this up. It's possible it's not accurate, nor even related to this rather light-hearted thread, because I tend to relate everything to body modification--it's just my thing. Cartesian theory is related to society's treatment of this subject, and I can provide more quotes from my sources--but I don't think that's what you are looking for.
I am also not handing anyone a list of reading material--I offered, in case anyone was interested. I'm just always eager to share my passion with other people--aren't you?
:(
You can't prove to me that you exist. Don't even bother, it's impossible.
Yes, I can.
I choose not to.
I completely understood what Cloud said, but I can't find the part where Cicero said anything.
I'm not a sloppy reader. ...Maybe you were thinking it in your head but didn't actually type it it into the computer? ::::confused::::
Yes, I can.
I choose not to.
[RIGHT]The proof is
too large to
fit in this
margin.[/RIGHT]
I flushed proof of my existence earlier.
Odd that this should come up in the "you can't prove you exist" thread, because one of the motivations, I think, that people have (among the legion) for body modification is just that--to prove to themselves that they exist, to reinforce the envelope of the body with meaning.
It's a tension between western society and history, and non-western society. The Greek ideal was of bodily perfection; furthered by the medieval Christian church's horror of imperfection and abnormaility, and by the Enlightenment philosophers, such as Decartes. "Civilization" in the Western view is the triumph of man over nature, but we are moving away from that.
Here is what Victoria Pitts, a scholar and the author of "In the Flesh" says:
"Among the problems of the self-mutiliation argument is that it uncritically relies on a classical ideal of the skin as a pristine, smooth, closed envelope for the self, and a notion of the body and self as fixed and unchanging. These notions were inherited from Enlightenment traditions . . The Enlightenment affirmed a mind/body binary in which the mind was seen as more significant, while the body was dismissed as a hindrance to [I]res cogitans, Decartes' term for the intellect and selfhood." [/I]
Opening the body in the form of pricking it with a needle goes against this Western idea of bodily boundaries. In tribal societies, both ancient and modern, this legacy is obviously lacking, and marking the body carries with it a whole slew of meanings, from status symbols to rites of passage, to marks of humanity.
If you are a Westerner, if you mark your body, you are mutilating it. You are demonstrating your disdain for traditional norms and are likely to be viewed as dangerous, criminal, sexually, deviant or psychologically disturbed. Some of these views are changing, of course, but try getting medical or dental treatment if you are heavily modded and see how lingering these ideas can be.
I hope I've added to your understanding. It's really a pretty complex question, and I certainly do not consider myself any kind of classical or Enlightenment scholar. I can recommend a number of good books if you are interested in body modification or philosophy of the human body.
Ok .....well if people in western civilization believe in Cartesian Philosophy and as you say "grossness of the body", which I have never heard an ancient say pertaining to this philosophy, what would be wrong with modification or mutilation?
In short.... this isn't adding up to me. Could you please clarify this for me?
This was my question which was more of a statement.
I'm still trying to get out of this conversation.
Cloud- just read through your own statements about what westerners believed about the body and see if anything comes up.
In your haste to link ancient philosophy with body modification you ended up contradicting yourself. No big deal.
I understand what you were trying to say. I was merely trying to get you to see a very minimal fault in your own logic (from thread to thread) without taking the time to spell it out. This completely blew up in my face because this is a forum and I have to do something obnoxious like quote out of your threads to get you to eat your words. Or do I? No... because it's not that important, and thus far I like you, and I am playing nice.
Can I be done with this now? I always end up completely off topic and I'm trying to get out of that terrible habit.
Someone says, "how 'bout them Bears?" and I start telling them about robots. :yelsick:
I'm sorry you feel I was unresponsive, but sure, I'm more than happy to drop it.
Ok .....well if people in western civilization believe in Cartesian Philosophy and as you say "grossness of the body", which I have never heard an ancient say pertaining to this philosophy, what would be wrong with modification or mutilation?
In short.... this isn't adding up to me. Could you please clarify this for me?
I wish I would have read this. I am the lazy skimmer it seems.:redface:
well, I have two people accusing me of ignoring them, which surprises me, because I thought I made an informative and thoughtful post.
My statement relating body modification to proving one's existence to myself is opinion only--just what struck me as I read the thread, and I don't have anything other than my personal feelings to back this up. It's possible it's not accurate, nor even related to this rather light-hearted thread, because I tend to relate everything to body modification--it's just my thing. Cartesian theory is related to society's treatment of this subject, and I can provide more quotes from my sources--but I don't think that's what you are looking for.
I am also not handing anyone a list of reading material--I offered, in case anyone was interested. I'm just always eager to share my passion with other people--aren't you?
:(
I didn't accuse you of ignoring me.
but anyway...I'm curious as to why do you say you relate everything to mody modification and it's just your 'thing'
what is it??your thing? What do you look like? Are you modified?Goth? what?
you know, I'm happy to discuss body modification ad nauseum, but I feel I've made some missteps here and don't want to exacerbate matters, so I think I'll just not hijack Flint's thread anymore.
...so I think I'll just not hijack Flint's thread anymore.
This thread is designed to make people think, and make people talk. I'm interested in what people are thinking about, and
how they think about things.
terrific. another misstep. Can't seem to get this right, and it's making me pretty sad.
Don't be sad, I like you. You're interesting. Like Digital Underground said: "Doowhatchalike"
This thread is designed to make people think, and make people talk. I'm interested in what people are thinking about, and how they think about things.
yeah, he dosn't care. He's not serious about anything.
He just likes to see what sticks...it's all experimental stuff aint that right flint?
so please tell..:angel:
You pretty much got it there. But there is an important distinction: Not taking things seriously, or approaching them in a straightforward manner, doesn't mean I don't care or that I'm not serious; that's just my way. I'm not shouting, I just want to emphasize that.
You pretty much got it there. But there is an important distinction: Not taking things seriously, or approaching them in a straightforward manner, doesn't mean I don't care or that I'm not serious; that's just my way. I'm not shouting, I just want to emphasize that.
In regards to ? ouside the internet ? Real life?
who thinks you are shouting?
You pretty much got it there. But there is an important distinction: Not taking things seriously, or approaching them in a straightforward manner, doesn't mean I don't care or that I'm not serious; that's just my way. I'm not shouting, I just want to emphasize that.
Ok....now I think your shouting. You doth protest too much.:D
what is it??your thing? What do you look like? Are you modified?Goth? what?
yep, Goth, that's me. :p
okay, not really. A wee bit too old for that, unfortunately.
Yes, I'm a girl. And to normal people, fairly heavily modded (although not extremely so to my modded buddies). Here's a thread showing one of my tattoos:
http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=13371&page=2&highlight=back+pieceIt's a beautiful tatoo cloud.
