Does anything exist? First, clarify the concept, then look for the thing, the object

  • Thread starter Thread starter KingCoil
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

KingCoil

Guest
Let us all consider whether it is the most important rule in any exchange of thoughts on the question whether anything at all exists, namely:

First, clarify the concept, then look for the thing, the object in the reality of existence corresponding to the concept.

If folks here do not accept that the above rule is the very first step in the exchange of thoughts to resolve the question whether something at all exists in the reality of existence, please then present what you hold to be the first rule to be observed by everyone in the concerted effort for resolving the existence of the thing in question.

KingCoil
 
Reason might manage to raise a doubt about the truth of a conclusion of natural inductive inference just for a moment in the study, but the forces of nature will soon overcome that artificial scepticism, and the sheer agreeableness of animal faith will protect us from excessive caution and sterile suspension of belief.

Or,
if you doubt a brick wall exists try kicking it.
 
The first thing you have to ask when reading my posts is, ‘did he really write that post, and does it really exist.’
 
First, clarify the concept, then look for the thing, the object in the reality of existence corresponding to the concept.
Click to expand...
“cogito ergo sum”

“How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?”
 
When he to whom a person speaks does not understand, and he who speaks does not understand himself, that is metaphysics.”
― Voltaire
 
NOTHING EXISTS.
  1. Nothing can come into existence. Consider the sentence: “Socrates comes into existence.”
Now, if Socrates does not exist, the sentence cannot be true, since the subject of the sentence (Socrates) is non-existent. But, if Socrates does already exist, then the sentence is also not true, since Socrates cannot ‘come’ into existence. Therefore, nothing can come into existence. Therefore, nothing exists.
  1. Furthermore, everthing is in a state of change. It is therefore ‘becoming’, but not being. Therefore, nothing exists.
  2. Furthermore, if something exists, it is either one or many. Now, the many cannot exist without the one. But the one cannot exist, since, in order to exist, it must have at least three dimensions. Therefore, nothing exists.
  3. Furthermore, the existence of ‘existent things’ is proved only by other existing things. But this is circular, since it relies upon what it seeks to demonstrate. Therefore, existence does not exist, since only existent things can be used to demonstrate existence, which is in itself in question. Therefore nothing exists.
SO, LET’S ALL RELAX AND DON’T WORRY!!😃
 
KingCoil said:
Let us all consider whether it is the most important rule in any exchange of thoughts on the question whether anything at all exists, namely:

First, clarify the concept, then look for the thing, the object in the reality of existence corresponding to the concept.

If folks here do not accept that the above rule is the very first step in the exchange of thoughts to resolve the question whether something at all exists in the reality of existence, please then present what you hold to be the first rule to be observed by everyone in the concerted effort for resolving the existence of the thing in question.

KingCoil
Click to expand...
People enter into discourse for a variety of reasons.
In exchanging ideas, the resolution of whether something exists or not is not necessarily the most important goal for both parties.
Sometimes people want to gain an understanding possessed by the other or conversely, convince them; sometimes people want to argue, show off their knowledge and debating abilities, or just humiliate the other person.
A lot of times people want to hang out and think about interesting things.
One can be perhaps more happy listening to unreality: someone’s dreams as they reveal the nature of the person one is talking to.
The first step then, in the exchange of thought is to gain an understanding of the other’s intent. From there it is important to listen to their views. It is equally important to share one’s own perspectives.
This is not to suggest that there is no objective reality, but that ultimately, human contact boils down to establishing a relationship: closer to that reality and more concrete than wispy thoughts.
 
Qoeleth said:
NOTHING EXISTS.
  1. Nothing can come into existence. Consider the sentence: “Socrates comes into existence.”
Now, if Socrates does not exist, the sentence cannot be true, since the subject of the sentence (Socrates) is non-existent. But, if Socrates does already exist, then the sentence is also not true, since Socrates cannot ‘come’ into existence. Therefore, nothing can come into existence. Therefore, nothing exists.
  1. Furthermore, everthing is in a state of change. It is therefore ‘becoming’, but not being. Therefore, nothing exists.
  2. Furthermore, if something exists, it is either one or many. Now, the many cannot exist without the one. But the one cannot exist, since, in order to exist, it must have at least three dimensions. Therefore, nothing exists.
  3. Furthermore, the existence of ‘existent things’ is proved only by other existing things. But this is circular, since it relies upon what it seeks to demonstrate. Therefore, existence does not exist, since only existent things can be used to demonstrate existence, which is in itself in question. Therefore nothing exists.
SO, LET’S ALL RELAX AND DON’T WORRY!!😃
Click to expand...
This is satire, right? Please tell me this is satire…
 
KingCoil said:
Let us all consider whether it is the most important rule in any exchange of thoughts on the question whether anything at all exists, namely:

First, clarify the concept, then look for the thing, the object in the reality of existence corresponding to the concept.

If folks here do not accept that the above rule is the very first step in the exchange of thoughts to resolve the question whether something at all exists in the reality of existence, please then present what you hold to be the first rule to be observed by everyone in the concerted effort for resolving the existence of the thing in question.

KingCoil
Click to expand...
If the world didn’t exist you wouldn’t be thinking about anything much. Certainly you wouldn’t be thinking about communication because, by your own admission, nothing exists outside your mind. So the first inkling of thought began when you realized ( as a baby ) that other things existed.

Linus2nd
 
KingCoil said:
Let us all consider whether it is the most important rule in any exchange of thoughts on the question whether anything at all exists, namely:

First, clarify the concept, then look for the thing, the object in the reality of existence corresponding to the concept.

If folks here do not accept that the above rule is the very first step in the exchange of thoughts to resolve the question whether something at all exists in the reality of existence, please then present what you hold to be the first rule to be observed by everyone in the concerted effort for resolving the existence of the thing in question.

KingCoil
Click to expand...
Are you taking a College Philosophy course and trying to get us to write a term paper for you? Sure sounds like it!
 
I believe that someone who has lived a relatively sheltered or pampered life is more likely to ask “does anything exist?” or “am I dreaming or awake?”. I don’t think someone who has had a hard life would ask these questions because hardship, danger, and pain is positive proof that this world we live in is very real.
 
livingwordunity said:
I believe that someone who has lived a relatively sheltered or pampered life is more likely to ask “does anything exist?” or “am I dreaming or awake?”. I don’t think someone who has had a hard life would ask these questions because hardship, danger, and pain is positive proof that this world we live in is very real.
Click to expand...
I agree with that. I would say that the modern tendency toward atheism isfrom a false sense of security that is the result of being pampered as well.
 
Your avitar is that of the sarecrow from "The Wizard of Oz.
He was in search of a brain. You have found one.
 
livingwordunity said:
I believe that someone who has lived a relatively sheltered or pampered life is more likely to ask “does anything exist?” or “am I dreaming or awake?”. I don’t think someone who has had a hard life would ask these questions because hardship, danger, and pain is positive proof that this world we live in is very real.
Click to expand...
Or it could be the other way around.

There are many stories told by the sages of people who have had hard lives, and one day, something inside them snaps, and they ‘wake up’, and realise that nothing exists (neither themselves nor the world). Or they realise that it is all a dream, or at least could be. Thereafter, they live in bliss.

The sages tell of a person who believed he was a peasant dwelling in poverty, but dreaming to be an emperor swathed in purple. One day, he realised that he was in fact the emperor swathed in purple, and merely dreaming to be a peasant dwelling in wretchedness. And so, he became happy.

Or another ancient sage tells the story of the ‘rich man’ feasting each day, and the beggar laying at his gate. One day, they both woke up from this dream, and the one who had been dreaming to be a rich man, found himself burning in Gehenna. Then the one who had been dreaming he was a beggar, woke up and found himself veritably in the bosom of Abraham.

Hence, the rich are merely dreaming they are rich, for they, in reality thay are going hungry, and the poor are merely dreaming to be poor, for in reality theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven. So, the conditions of this world do not partake of reality. Hence, nothing in this world truly exists.

This is the lesson of life…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top