If God doesn't exist, do you?

I think, therefore I am.

translation: the only thing you can prove is yourself. therefore, a Hive Mind is the best way to prove things.

yes, because i'm sitting right here, typing thislerfish

I think, therefore I am.

translation: the only thing you can prove is yourself. therefore, a Hive Mind is the best way to prove things.

Hewkii

I dont need a god to tell me I exist.Jaforbe

[QUOTE="Hewkii"]

I think, therefore I am.

translation: the only thing you can prove is yourself. therefore, a Hive Mind is the best way to prove things.

TheFlameProof

well thats sounds impossible to figure out... but i know i exist... i just dont know about the rest of you

I think, therefore I am.

translation: the only thing you can prove is yourself. therefore, a Hive Mind is the best way to prove things.

Hewkii

I think I...wait

*fades to nothing*

Because I do. Alright?Jaforbe

[QUOTE="Jaforbe"]Because I do. Alright?TheFlameProof

[QUOTE="Jaforbe"]Because I do. Alright?TheFlameProof

I just pinched my arm and now it hurts so I think I'm qualified to say that I'm not an emotionless machine. I can't prove to everyone here that I'm a human so if you don't want to believe me then go right ahead.dracula_16

[QUOTE="TheFlameProof"][QUOTE="Jaforbe"]Because I do. Alright?LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Hewkii"]

I think, therefore I am.

translation: the only thing you can prove is yourself. therefore, a Hive Mind is the best way to prove things.

TheFlameProof

Go read some Descartes. The only thing we can prove, (beyond even proving God, as Descartes wrestled with) is that we exist as a a mind/spirit that thinks. We may not be able to prove our world or our bodies, but we can prove that. It doesn't matter what the source of our thinking essence is or where it comes from, point is that we, as thinking constructs, exist.

i just know this thread is going to force me to open the Meditations again. I really don't want to.

Basically, contrary to the strange idea your attempting to posit, it's not possible to divorce thought from the thinker responsible for generating those thoughts. If you doubt, someone must be doing the doubting, and hence a thinker chained to your thoughts, is having those feelings, and regardless of the relation, that entity is at some level you.

If you want an epistemological problem that really baffles answer, try this one on for size: how do you know that the world wasn't, in reality, created just five minutes ago, including all of our memories, history books, etc?

Granted, philosophers generally disqualify questions like those on the basis that just as they cannot be disproven, they also cannot be proven.

but how is capable thinking and reasoning a trait of existence? what if nonexistence also have those traits?
TheFlameProof

but how is capable thinking and reasoning a trait of existence? what if nonexistence also have those traits?
TheFlameProof

you can't put forward something like that without detailing how that would work. Thought in non-existence is an obvious paradox.

no simpley god wouldn't have existed and we'ld have come from another source, it's like saying that before newton made his laws of gravity there was no gravitymarkop2003

[QUOTE="markop2003"]no simpley god wouldn't have existed and we'ld have come from another source, it's like saying that before newton made his laws of gravity there was no gravityLJS9502_basic

Yes he did! :P

[QUOTE="TheFlameProof"][QUOTE="Hewkii"]

I think, therefore I am.

translation: the only thing you can prove is yourself. therefore, a Hive Mind is the best way to prove things.

Paladin_King

Go read some Descartes. The only thing we can prove, (beyond even proving God, as Descartes wrestled with) is that we exist as a a mind/spirit that thinks. We may not be able to prove our world or our bodies, but we can prove that. It doesn't matter what the source of our thinking essence is or where it comes from, point is that we, as thinking constructs, exist.

i just know this thread is going to force me to open the Meditations again. I really don't want to.

Basically, contrary to the strange idea your attempting to posit, it's not possible to divorce thought from the thinker responsible for generating those thoughts. If you doubt, someone must be doing the doubting, and hence a thinker chained to your thoughts, is having those feelings, and regardless of the relation, that entity is at some level you.

If you want an epistemological problem that really baffles answer, try this one on for size: how do you know that the world wasn't, in reality, created just five minutes ago, including all of our memories, history books, etc?

Granted, philosophers generally disqualify questions like those on the basis that just as they cannot be disproven, they also cannot be proven.

philosophers can't prove that reality was created five minutes ago because this COULD ALL BE A DREAM. WE COULD ALL PROBABLY BE IMAGINARY. we could all really be leading our lives in disjointed segments, like a dream, and not really feel any of that disjointedness because reality is being constantly recreated for us.
TheFlameProof

[QUOTE="Jaforbe"]Because I do. Alright?TheFlameProof

This ended the thread for me right here. I dont mind posting but just typing crap to keep a lame thread on top is stupid. Why might we be fictional characters? Why is it fishy we know how to use this technology?It didnt happen overnight. WE PROBABLY DONT EXIST?!?! Give me a break.

[QUOTE="TheFlameProof"]but how is capable thinking and reasoning a trait of existence? what if nonexistence also have those traits?
Paladin_King

you can't put forward something like that without detailing how that would work. Thought in non-existence is an obvious paradox.

[QUOTE="TheFlameProof"] philosophers can't prove that reality was created five minutes ago because this COULD ALL BE A DREAM. WE COULD ALL PROBABLY BE IMAGINARY. we could all really be leading our lives in disjointed segments, like a dream, and not really feel any of that disjointedness because reality is being constantly recreated for us.
LJS9502_basic

Maybe I do exist, and maybe I don't. I don't think it's possible for me to categorically prove that I exist in some form.

Plus, I'm hungry, and I need to go to school, so I'd rather not bother explaining my thoughts on the subject. It'd take too long.

yeah, but how is human thought logically possible?
TheFlameProof

Why do we need god in order to exist?DeeJayInphinity

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"]Why do we need god in order to exist?TheFlameProof

[QUOTE="TheFlameProof"] yeah, but how is human thought logically possible?
LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Jaforbe"]Because I do. Alright?TheFlameProof

A quick logical recap: if A then B then if Non(B) then Non(a)

So, let's presume God's existence is A and our existence is B

So if the statement that our existence is proof of God's existence, then if we didn't exist, God would not exist either.

i know we think, that's for sure, i'm just saying that how was it made possible? i think that thinking would be something that was impossible before and made possible through something virtually unknown. i'm just trying to prove my point that just because we can't think it possible, doesn't mean it is? or maybe i'm just going about this all wrong ...
TheFlameProof

[QUOTE="TheFlameProof"][QUOTE="Jaforbe"]Because I do. Alright?-Twilight-

A quick logical recap: if A then B then if Non(B) then Non(a)

So, let's presume God's existence is A and our existence is B

So if the statement that our existence is proof of God's existence, then if we didn't exist, God would not exist either.

leeveeu

[QUOTE="TheFlameProof"] i know we think, that's for sure, i'm just saying that how was it made possible? i think that thinking would be something that was impossible before and made possible through something virtually unknown. i'm just trying to prove my point that just because we can't think it possible, doesn't mean it is? or maybe i'm just going about this all wrong ...
LJS9502_basic

God's existence and our own are different things. I think that people who don't believe in god won't say he created us, so the way you started this topic is a little off.

Yup, Descartes all the way, I think therefore i am, it's the only certainty that i have. I can be pluged to a machine that gives me all my sensorial data (i can be still, laid down yet feel my body moving, see it, etc.) and i wouldn't be able to tell it. You may all be bots, sensorial data i receive, nothing more.

God's existence and our own are different things. I think that people who don't believe in god won't say he created us, so the way you started this topic is a little off.

Yup, Descartes all the way, I think therefore i am, it's the only certainty that i have. I can be pluged to a machine that gives me all my sensorial data (i can be still, laid down yet feel my body moving, see it, etc.) and i wouldn't be able to tell it. You may all be bots, sensorial data i receive, nothing more.

watchmen89

[QUOTE="watchmen89"]

God's existence and our own are different things. I think that people who don't believe in god won't say he created us, so the way you started this topic is a little off.

Yup, Descartes all the way, I think therefore i am, it's the only certainty that i have. I can be pluged to a machine that gives me all my sensorial data (i can be still, laid down yet feel my body moving, see it, etc.) and i wouldn't be able to tell it. You may all be bots, sensorial data i receive, nothing more.

TheFlameProof

Maybe what you call "existing" isn't the same to me. You do exist as a "thinking object" not as a person the way you see other people walking down the street. If by "existing" you're reffering to a body and a mind as a all, then you may never be able to prove your existence. Read Descartes' work, it's really good, it will also help you with the question "does god exist" ;)

This thread is mind-boggling.kingdre

yes, because i'm sitting right here, typing thislerfish