• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Prove you exist

The existence of the question to a person "can you prove you exist?" is proof per se the answer is "yes" by virtue that the question itself can exist to that person.

To post on this forum "does this forum really exist?" inherently proves that it does by the existence of the question itself on the forum.

However, that does not proof existence of the forum to other than who knows the existence of the question.

A person knows he/she exists. But can not know within these dimensions and his/her own intellectual abilities and senses whether anyone else really does. I can know I exist. I cannot really know for certain that you do. You may be just my own delusions.
 
joko104 said:
The existence of the question to a person "can you prove you exist?" is proof per se the answer is "yes" by virtue that the question itself can exist to that person.

To post on this forum "does this forum really exist?" inherently proves that it does by the existence of the question itself on the forum.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is the longer explanation of what Jerry did when he answered "No". Any response is proof.
 
wolfman24 said:
i am going to try something and I hope the mods won't get all bend out of shape since this is actually a practical exercise in general philosophy classes in many colleges.

i got the idea from a comment yesterday night on the news. The person being interviewed said that our society no longer views facts as absolute and unchanging.

We all take ourselves are obvious facts. But are we from a philosophical standpoint.

In my senior year in college one of the guys in the house I was in was a philosophy major and he taught me how to do this.

Heres the deal. There are actually only three ways you can seemingly prove you exist. If you get one right you will see a +1 in my response. If not nothing.

Remember this is an exercise in philosophy and can get frustrating.

Anyone game? Prove you exist.
Click to expand...

i liked your post..
 
Medusa said:
i liked your post..
Click to expand...

Thanks. I enjoy using my head and thinking outside the box sometimes WAAAYY outside. its a habit I got into in college. Its useful and passes the time.

The main purpose though was to try and get people to think about what FACTS are. They are slung around like manure sometimes (me included). but are they really facts?

If you can't prove you exist how can you as a thinking person prove a fact on its own merit?

Thats the main draw for scientists. We go over and over and over stuff until there are no other rationale alternatives, then we say they are facts.

I think the Sherlock Holmes quote says it best.
 
wolfman24 said:
Thanks. I enjoy using my head and thinking outside the box sometimes WAAAYY outside. its a habit I got into in college. Its useful and passes the time.

The main purpose though was to try and get people to think about what FACTS are. They are slung around like manure sometimes (me included). but are they really facts?

If you can't prove you exist how can you as a thinking person prove a fact on its own merit?

Thats the main draw for scientists. We go over and over and over stuff until there are no other rationale alternatives, then we say they are facts.

I think the Sherlock Holmes quote says it best.
Click to expand...

yes ,and when even scientific facts can change , we must know where to stop
 
wolfman24 said:
Thanks. I enjoy using my head and thinking outside the box sometimes WAAAYY outside. its a habit I got into in college. Its useful and passes the time.

The main purpose though was to try and get people to think about what FACTS are. They are slung around like manure sometimes (me included). but are they really facts?

If you can't prove you exist how can you as a thinking person prove a fact on its own merit?

Thats the main draw for scientists. We go over and over and over stuff until there are no other rationale alternatives, then we say they are facts.

I think the Sherlock Holmes quote says it best.
Click to expand...

I think Shakespeare said it best "To be, or not to be, that is the question?"

The answer is self evident by the response "I Am."
 
Medusa said:
yes ,and when even scientific facts can change , we must know where to stop
Click to expand...

I was going to include that. The problem is that in reality there is no stopping. everything moves forward and so will real and imagined facts.
 
wolfman24 said:
Ok this is close. I think we have gone around the mulberry bush enough. Heres the other two as they were explained to me.

Pain - Not normal pain but the child birth, kidney stones, being shot repeatedly or severly burned type. In dreams or hallucinations you may have visions of pain but not feel the intensity of it. In my dreams I can touch stuff and believe I feel what i touch (tactile memory) but I have no memory of ever having a dream where I was in this type of situation. Thats my perspective.

I can see his point here but if you want to discuss it feel free.

This is the one I never got.

Death - That is post death experiences which end up with you eventually returning to the world of the living. He stated that in this state if you are seeing you lying there you must exist if I remember right it had something to do with the brains abiliity to function or react at such times.

Like I said these were this philosophy guys comment based on classes he took.

My point in all this was to see if there was a census whether what are viewed as facts (we exist) by the majority are facts or just the illusion of facts.

Comments.
Click to expand...

Interesting! But I didn't get my +1 :(
 
I can not prove that I exist for I can not prove that you exist.
 
Noidberg said:
I can not prove that I exist for I can not prove that you exist.
Click to expand...

interesting idea - Mutually exclusive I would like to assign a point here but I have to follow the rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom