Does Matter Really Exist?

[Iacchus]

Thought (this includes our dreams also) is the dimension that exists outside of time and space.

Prove it.

And yet, you are perfectly capable of proving what exists within time and space. Doesn't this tell you that your mind exists outside of its domain? Otherwise, where is your objectivity? ... besides this imaginary place that exists between your ears!

 

[Genesius]

And yet, you are perfectly capable of proving what exists within time and space. Doesn't this tell you that your mind exists outside of its domain? Otherwise, where is your objectivity? ... besides this imaginary place that exists between your ears!

I can believe what exists between your ears is imaginary - I know what is between my ears is real because I can hear it sloshing around when I shake my head at your posts.

Let's see, objectivity:

objectivity

n : judgment based on observable phenomena and uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices

OK, please provide evidence based on observable phenomena and uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices that your mind exists outside of time and space.

I can fully accept that my mind exists as a part of "time and space" and yet use that mind to interpret observable phenomena that are also part of "time and space". Nothing here that says I can't be "objective" and still be a part of the material universe.

 

[Belz...]

And, has it not already been mentioned and/or explained that God exists outside of the parameters of Time and Space?

You're jumping arguments, here. We were discussing the thought that the universe exists "within" something else, not God's existence and/or nature.

 

[Belz...]

You say that there's no mystery. I say that you're wrong. Because it's all a mystery, that exists in the space between our ears. So, when you get right down to it, we are, all in fact mystics.

Absolutely not.

What's so mysterious about it ? Looking at the world around me, I find it pretty mundane and logical. So, where's the mystery ?

 

[Belz...]

And when the time comes that you can accept that the mystic is none other than you, you will need no proof.

It's really unfortunate that you've retreated back to your senseless drivel. I really thought, for a split second, that you had made progress.

 

[Belz...]

Yes, and very much the idealist. Because you cannot prove anything outside of what your mind tells you.

I wasn't aware that we could prove what our minds tell us.

 

[Belz...]

Thought (this includes our dreams also) is the dimension that exists outside of time and space.

If that were the case, no time would elapse when you dream. This is clearly false.

 

[Belz...]

Yes, but what is it that does the perceiving, if not something from another (higher) dimension?

It's been explained to you before, Iacchus, that this line of thought is incoherent. How could something outside reality observe it ?

Also, would this not imply that the dimensions of time and space are merely supplemental, in that the higher dimensions (which are not visible by means of time and space) have always existed, prior to that?

You still don't know what a dimension is ? Forget Hollywood. It's not like a plane of existence in a role-playing game!

 

[Genesius]

Absolutely not.

What's so mysterious about it ? Looking at the world around me, I find it pretty mundane and logical. So, where's the mystery ?

The mystery is: "Why can't Iacchus give a straight answer to a simple question?"

 

[Iacchus]

Let's see, objectivity:

objectivity

n : judgment based on observable phenomena and uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices

Yes, and by virtue of the fact that you are the person who is observing it, how does it not become impersonal? Indeed, how is it that you are capable of observing anything, unless you stand outside of it?

 

[Iacchus]

You're jumping arguments, here. We were discussing the thought that the universe exists "within" something else, not God's existence and/or nature.

And I don't suppose you remember the original post?

 

[Bone_Vulture]

And yet, you are perfectly capable of proving what exists within time and space. Doesn't this tell you that your mind exists outside of its domain? Otherwise, where is your objectivity? ... besides this imaginary place that exists between your ears!

Now you're starting to get repetive. Soon, we can make a Moebius strip out of this thread.

 

[Genesius]

Yes, and by virtue of the fact that you are the person who is observing it, how does it not become impersonal? Indeed, how is it that you are capable of observing anything, unless you stand outside of it?

I am capable of observing something because photons of light bounce off that object and into my eyes. No need to stand outside of something to observe it: I am currently sitting inside a room yet I am quite capable of observing said room. In much the same way my mind is capable of observing the universe while still being inside the universe.

Edited for spelling.

 

[Iacchus]

The mystery is: "Why can't Iacchus give a straight answer to a simple question?"

Because you are unwilling to look within perhaps?

 

[Genesius]

The mystery continues. . .

 

[Iacchus]

I am capable of observing something because photons of light bounce off that object and into my eyes. No need to stand outside of something to observe it: I am currently sitting inside a room yet I am quite cabaple of observing said room.

That still doesn't explain what that "you" is that is observing it.

In much the same way my mind is capable of observing the universe while still being inside the universe.

The greater circle (of consciousness) stands outside of, as well as within the lesser circle (of time and space).

 

[Iacchus]

The mystery continues. . .

Yes, and until you can accept the mystic in yourself, it will continue ...

 

[Iacchus]

It's been explained to you before, Iacchus, that this line of thought is incoherent. How could something outside reality observe it ?

You still don't know what a dimension is ? Forget Hollywood. It's not like a plane of existence in a role-playing game!

So, what is the point of time and space, without the awareness of time and space?

 

[Mercutio]

Iacchus, you claim that you revise things when you have been shown wrong. Why, then, do you still continue to make the same claims that contradict the evidence in psychophysiology/neurolog (your claim about the space between our ears--you are quite simply wrong), dreams and dreaming (another dimension? You are quite simply wrong), Dimensions of time/space (whether you claim god, dreams, or thoughts exist "outside of time and space", you are quite simply wrong independently of your wrongness about the evidence).

Why do you lie when you claim you revise things when you have been shown wrong? Why not just be up front about it and be the proudly, willfully ignorant person you really are? Why hide behind quotation marks and vague claims of mysticism? Why not just admit that you reject the reality, logic, evidence, that the rest of us call the real world? Why come to this board at all, if the only way you can respond to rebuttals is by withdrawing into a fantasyland of neologisms and redefinitions? I mean, it is no big deal for us to respond to your posts--it is like talking to a high school sophomore--but it must really get to you some times, unless you absolutely *live* in denial and fantasy.

 

[Iacchus]

It's quite simple, really. My experience tells me otherwise.