This site is supported by Nobility Studios.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

I know one thing which is absolutely true, can you think of anything else?

22 posts in this topic

Posted

I am.

That's absolutely true (as long as I am) objectively and has reflexive properties.

I'm wondering if anyone can think of anything else?

Cheers,

Inzababa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

If "objectively" is denoting a mode of being cognition independent and you only know that you are experentially and hence cognitively it seems you are side stepping the how of the claim to absolute truth.

Edited by DeadCanDance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's funny how some people continue to recycle 400 year old arguments without ever learning of their refutations. :doh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If trol...er...Inzababa is absolutely true as far as he is concerned, but I am not, but I am absolutely true as far as I'm concerned, but Indababa is not, how do we determine which of us is right, or even if any of us are right? :confused:

In short: Yes, Descartes, that's very nice, but how can WE be sure you exist?

This is the third reply to a boring, useless topic.:shakehead:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If "objectively" is denoting a mode of being cognition independent and you only know that you are experentially and hence cognitively it seems you are side stepping the how of the claim to absolute truth.

no, "objectively" denotes a truth with is still true regardless of what perspective you "look" at it.

It's funny how some people continue to recycle 400 year old arguments without ever learning of their refutations. :doh:

no it's not

This is the third reply to a boring, useless topic. :shakehead:

then don't reply fool

cause only a fool would reply to a topic he finds boring and useless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Tell you what, let's give everybody (yourself included) a real challenge. If one were to ask, "Does Inzababa" exist, it's boring, because you know you exist, and we don't care. If, however, one were to ask, "What is the point of Inzababa's existence," well, everybody here would be hard pressed to come up with a satisfactory answer.

So, ask us, "What is the point of my (Inzababa's) existence" and watch us scratch our heads as we fails to determine what is the point in you.

Edited by DaveT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Tell you what, let's give everybody (yourself included) a real challenge. If one were to ask, "Does Inzababa" exist, it's boring, because you know you exist, and we don't care. If, however, one were to ask, "What is the point of Inzababa's existence," well, everybody here would be hard pressed to come up with a satisfactory answer.

So, ask us, "What is the point of my (Inzababa's) existence" and watch us scratch our heads as we fails to determine what is the point in you.

not until you reply to this question :

why do you reply to a topic you find boring and useless?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

To let you know that you are making useless posts in the hope that you'll stop doing it.

Judging by your latest efforts in TIm's thread, you haven't learned anything. :nono:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

To let you know that you are making useless posts in the hope that you'll stop doing it.

Judging by your latest efforts in TIm's thread, you haven't learned anything. :nono:

ok thanks, I know that now :)

(very kind and generous of you)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Your attempts at wit leave much to be desired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Your attempts at wit leave much to be desired.

then forget desire, I'm trying to be rational here sir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Try harder, sirrah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why out of all these posts, only one post actually replies to the question?

What happened to actually replying to the OP's question when replying on one of his threads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I guess people aren't dignifying it with a reply.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's funny how some people continue to recycle 400 year old arguments without ever learning of their refutations. :doh:

Strawman, rather than recycle.

If Descartes had tried to apply his Cogito principle objectively, he would have ended up saying 'I doubt I exist, but to doubt is to think, and to think one must be, so anyone who doubts my existence must accept that I exist, for they cannot doubt my existence without thinking of my existence'

I'm sure Inzababa would say something much more convoluted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's funny how some people continue to recycle 400 year old arguments without ever learning of their refutations. :doh:

Strawman, rather than recycle.

If Descartes had tried to apply his Cogito principle objectively, he would have ended up saying 'I doubt I exist, but to doubt is to think, and to think one must be, so anyone who doubts my existence must accept that I exist, for they cannot doubt my existence without thinking of my existence'

I'm sure Inzababa would say something much more convoluted.

and yet again..;

Who cares what Descartes this that or the other?

I, Inzababa (not Descartes), asked very nicely and politely, whether anyone could come up with something which was absolutely true objectively and had reflexive properties.

No?

Never mind then, good bye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Descartes came up with it first, only he acknowledged that it could only be proven to be true (objectively and reflexively) to him.

Cogito, ergo sum.

And you're now trying to rip it off and throwing your condescension my way because I mentioned his name.

You don't get to boast of your aspirations to step onto the moon after shooting down any mention of Buzz Aldrin and you don't get to rip off Descartes without being caught out on this board!

Go away, you soil-dwelling amoeba!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Personally, I like Augustine's contention better than the cogito: if I am deceived, I exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Personally, I like Augustine's contention better than the cogito: if I am deceived, I exist.

Why do u like that contention better?

And how is it any different from Descartes' formulation (which is more nuanced and actually philosophically relevant to his system)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What if he is deceived about his existence?

"Augustine, you exist!"

"Do I? Well, if you say it, I guess I do."

"HA! You were deceived! You don't exist at all!"

"Curses, he's right, I don't exist! I was deceived, which means I must exist, which means I wasn't deceived, which means I don't exist!"

"This has got you thinking, hasn't it?"

"Exactly! Where's Descartes when one needs him?"

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I am.

That's absolutely true (as long as I am) objectively and has reflexive properties.

I'm wondering if anyone can think of anything else?

Cheers,

Inzababa

Narrow down the "I" by describing what this "I" is. Once you prove that the "I" is something static, non-changing and continuous (moment to moment) then the "I" may be "am". However, every time you attempt to identify the "I" you will fail. All you can do is describe the "I" (if it exists), but you cannot tell me what the "I" is. It cannot be the body (or mental phenomenon) because I can then begin to take parts of the body away (or thoughts and experiences), and shrink your field of existence one piece at a time. Eventually you will discover this "I" is an illusion. We can try this is you like. Just tell us what the "I" IS. Peace.

Edited by Da Fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I am.

That's absolutely true (as long as I am) objectively and has reflexive properties.

Nine children are lined up and they all get picked for teams except one. He has tousled hair and too short of legs. He can't move fast. He says, "Hey! I exist!" Well, yes--.

How is this being used here? If Inzababa says, "I exist", what's being done? It's not doing what that last child was doing. We're not drawing attention to some unfair social practices in 6th grade. "I exist." What's something that doesn't exist? Unicorns. I've read about those in fairy tales. You can find pictures of them on the internet. Even so, they don't exist. I know about science and history and photoshop. You can't fool me. The existence of unicorns is not something I'm uncertain about. It's something I could be wrong about, though, because at any point a unicorn could pop in the front door and say, "I exist!" (though doing so uninvited would be bad taste-- you shouldn't invite yourself in unless you know somebody). I have a good idea of what a real unicorn would be like. Of course I do.

"I exist". The table in front of me exists. It is an indisputable fact. One can't very well dispute the reality of this table! It's right here! But that just means: no one ever does dispute that tables in front of them exist. This causes a problem. There ends up being a distinct lack of criteria with which to show the difference between a real table in front of you and a fake table in front of you. This means that disputations about existences of tables in front of people don't really come to anything in particular. Who's right? Who's left? No one knows. Everyone gets very flustered, their cheeks get red. There are eager exhortations to rationality all round. The table just stands there until everyone's done, and after that it stands a bit more. Eventually someone puts a sandwich down and has lunch.

"I exist". That seems a bit similar to the table. Who ever heard of saying to someone, "You don't exist!"? Preposterous. It's not done in polite society. If you do that you're just a mean person. And if I say "I exist", that isn't clarifying whether something is true or not. What would it mean for me not to exist? How would that work? What's the difference between a real me and a fake me? I'm not sure. I wasn't taught that in school. "I exist"? Am I telling someone to pick me for their team? To show them a point about pronouns in English? To parade my superior social standing about in front of a nonentity? Existence-- now that's a mystery. Do I exist? Well, I'm not sure what that means yet, if that is all that's said. I wish someone would tell me.

Edited by John Castillo
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0