Does "I" Exist? Or, Just a Concept?

[Iacchus]

Ok, the irony in this paragraph is just too much to ignore. Once more you conflate the two definitions of reason, but that is minor (and may even, if we are charitable, be seen as humor on your part). Much funnier is the idea of the man who demonstrates less knowlege about the intricacies of the universe at either the vast scale or the personal scale saying "it makes too much sense".

And why shouldn't I be allowed to put it into such terms ... if, in fact I agree that there's a grand purpose behind it all?

Only by oversimplifying the universe to the point of lunacy have you managed to "explain" it (in quotes for irony, Iacchus; the joke is that you don't explain it at all). The evidence of your posts suggests that, to you, the universe is thoroughly unexplainable...but you just don't know it.

Actually, for the most part, I could care less about what goes on on the outside. Happiness has more to do with an internal state of affairs.

 

[Iacchus]

You are, of course, perfectly entitled to speak for yourself here, but not for anyone else.

So, OK, we're talking about the space between your ears.

As if to say, yours somehow works differently than mine?

 

[ImaginalDisc]

And why shouldn't I be allowed to put it into such terms ... if, in fact I agree that there's a grand purpose behind it all?

Actually, for the most part, I could care less about what goes on outside of me. Happiness has more to do with an internal state of affairs.

I assume you mean "I couldn't care less..." Is that so? If the world if full of injustice, despair, hatred, and tyranny, that's ok? If you fall down and land on a sharp rock, that's ok? You don't eat? You can assert that there's a grand purpose, but asserting it does not make it true. This is not a self evident truth. Repeating it does not make it so.

 

[Mercutio]

And why shouldn't I be allowed to put it into such terms ... if, in fact I agree that there's a grand purpose behind it all?

No reason at all. Just be aware that the rest of the English-speaking world sees a distinction between the two uses, and that as a result you come off looking ignorant at best.

Actually, for the most part, I could care less about what goes on outside of me. Happiness has more to do with an internal state of affairs.

Evidence suggests, though, that you are not equally willing to let "what goes on outside of you" well enough alone. I truly wish you all sorts of inner happiness (what was it Penn said about heroin?), and I wish you meant what you said about not caring about the outside; it would certainly save you the time you spend here making baseless claims.

 

[Iacchus]

A question that implicitly assumes the answer you are after. Would you accept, though, that the body (of which the brain is an inseparable part) is that which employs the brain. It also employs the hand, the great toe, the large intestine, and the tonsils. Among other things.

Will you accept that answer?

You are missing something here. It is called a "living will."

 

[Iacchus]

I assume you mean "I couldn't care less..." Is that so? If the world if full of injustice, despair, hatred, and tyranny, that's ok? If you fall down and land on a sharp rock, that's ok? You don't eat? You can assert that there's a grand purpose, but asserting it does not make it true. This is not a self evident truth. Repeating it does not make it so.

I have found my nirvana, if that's what you mean.

 

[Mercutio]

You are missing something here. It is called a "living will."

Look at the GM's thread on "the power of Will". You will see that I am missing nothing here. You, however, are assuming something for which there is no evidence. Which is often your problem. You asked the question, you got an answer, but you did not wish to accept it because it did not fit with what your preconceived notion was of what the answer must be.

Why, then, did you ask the question in the first place? Especially if, as you claim, you don't care that much about what goes on in the outside world?

 

[ImaginalDisc]

You are missing something here. It is called a "living will."

Speaking of misusing words, "living will" commonly refers to a legal document expressing a person's wishes of what is to be done with them, if they enter a persistent vegetative state. What on Earth does it mean in Iacchus quotation-markese?

 

[Mojo]

As if to say, yours somehow works differently than mine?

It's not a question of how it works; it's how you are prepared to apply it.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I have found my nirvana, if that's what you mean.

No, I mean that you are babbling innanely, and entertaining fantasies of being the man who leaves Plato's allegory of the cave, using the fact that no one understands your...pardon me while I consult a thesaurus to find a delicate term...drivel as evidence that you are right.

 

[Iacchus]

Oh, the Universe isn't thorughly explainable? Gosh, let's just stop doing science. I guess we had better toss away all science and technology. Alright then, will you chase the wooly mammoth while I chuck the wooden, fire-hardened tipped spear? Oh wait, fire-hardening spear tips is an application of reason, definition 2, and science. I guess we can't even have those.

No, you're the one who says there is no reason for this.

You are asserting that there must be a "grand reason". Astounding. Allow me to summarize your reasoning.

1. "I" may, or may not exist.
2. ???
3. Therefore, god exists.

No.

1. "I" do in fact exist.
2. Of this I am reasonably certain.
3. However, it is not me that tells me this is so. Whatever it is that created me tells me this is so. It too, must exist by virtue of and/or the origin reason.

Let me relate the story of Zen Master Gui, a koan, if you will. Zen Master Gui had a very vivid dream. He dreamt he was a butterfly, flitting from flower to flower without thought. When he awoke, he was so disoriented that he asked, "Am I a man who dreamt I was a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming I am a man?" If the world we live in, and my existance is all a dream, then it's a very internally consistent one, and there is no evidence that is it a dream. If it is not, than the universe is occasionaly harsh, but rational. The assertion that the world is a dream is completely unfalsifiable. So is your assertion that there is a "grand reason".

"It" all comes from the same place.

 

[Iacchus]

No reason at all. Just be aware that the rest of the English-speaking world sees a distinction between the two uses, and that as a result you come off looking ignorant at best.

Yes, I acknowledge that there are two uses. However, I wouldn't suggest otherwise if it all didn't come from the same place.

Evidence suggests, though, that you are not equally willing to let "what goes on outside of you" well enough alone. I truly wish you all sorts of inner happiness (what was it Penn said about heroin?), and I wish you meant what you said about not caring about the outside; it would certainly save you the time you spend here making baseless claims.

The problem is, I am "stuck" while I am here.

 

[Iacchus]

Speaking of misusing words, "living will" commonly refers to a legal document expressing a person's wishes of what is to be done with them, if they enter a persistent vegetative state. What on Earth does it mean in Iacchus quotation-markese?

Yes, what to do with me while I'm still capable of thinking about it.

 

[Iacchus]

It's not a question of how it works; it's how you are prepared to apply it.

So now, since you didn't seem to understand why I brought it up in the first place, what do you think about the "I" which doesn't really exist ... outside of the concept "matter" that is? Of course if that's all it really is, then we can't have faith in ourselves, can we? There would be no point to it, correct?

 

[ImaginalDisc]

So now, since you didn't seem to understand why I brought it up in the first place, what do you think about the "I" which doesn't really exist ... outside of the concept "matter" that is? Of course if that's all it really is, then we can't have faith in ourselves, can we? There would be no point to it, correct?

Define faith. Define I. Define matter. We can't have a reasonable discussion about those three subjects until you gve a working definition, or use the ones found in the dictionary, and make clear which ones you are using this time.

 

[Dancing David]

Yet there would be no need to put "me" and/or "you" into the picture if it was all seemless and part of the environment would there? Why do we have a sense of identity and the need to differentiate between anything then?

Or, let me ask you this. Are you capable of discerning between the cup you are drinking out of and the water you are drinking out of the cup? Obviously the two are related (i.e., the process of drinking) but, they're not one and the same.

Your first statement doesn't make sense to me, so you cloud elaborate. Nature is discrete to all apearance, a tree is not a flower, they may share the molecules that they breathe, but they appear to be seprate.

You are making the assertion that the experiences are seperate from the brain, you are the one with the burden of proof.

The galls ain't half full, the water is the cup in this case.

 

[l0rca]

11 Better things to do than argue with Iacchus:

1: Cook soup
2: Write a letter to a girl
3: Play with the dog
4: Play pool on Yahoo
5: Play chess on Yahoo
6: Listen to Sonny Rollins
7: Try your hand at unification theory
8: Read some Celine.
9: Lift weights
10: Use ventrilo, or a phone
11: Eat soup

 

[Iacchus]

Your first statement doesn't make sense to me, so you cloud elaborate. Nature is discrete to all apearance, a tree is not a flower, they may share the molecules that they breathe, but they appear to be seprate.

What would there be to differentiate if everything is all the same?

You are making the assertion that the experiences are seperate from the brain, you are the one with the burden of proof.

The brain is a big lump of fat.

 

[Iacchus]

Define faith. Define I. Define matter. We can't have a reasonable discussion about those three subjects until you gve a working definition, or use the ones found in the dictionary, and make clear which ones you are using this time.

Do you believe in who you are? That as an entity you are real? How do you know that anything else is real? Do you put your trust (faith) soley in science? Or, do you believe it's possible to believe things for youself? This is what I mean by having faith in yourself.

 

[kuroyume0161]

The brain is a big lump of fat.

I must protest and protest and protest some more!

The brain is not a big lump of fat. It is a complex network of neurons as well as blood vessels supplying oxygen to keep those neurons firing and the brain cooled.

I highly recommend for you (and others as well) to watch the videos from the 2005 Skeptics Society Annual Conference: Brain, Mind and Consciousness. The brain is complex. It is the most complex system that we know exists!

Now all of your odd ideas make sense. You don't think there is a brain of any use in your head!