Close Topic Options

Existence

I grow fatigued and irked by all those relentless philosophers who challenge even the very being of our existence. At some points it seems ridiculous; at other times it sparks interest. What do you think of those philosophers who say, in a quote by Poe, "All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream."

Do you laugh, scorn, or conform?

Existence

Oh come now, "Do We Exist?" is THE quintessential philosophical question that will always be discussed among any real philosopher. Its a truly a question without a concrete, provable answer to it. You can always come of with an answer and counter point to any answer given. Its a question asked for the sake of discussing a philosophical issue for the sake of philosophy. No one truly expects to come up with a real answer to that question, but its allot of fun to try. How can it irk you sometimes and spark your interest at others? Its always the same question!

Existence Health & Special Psychology

In some way or another I think it is obvious that we must exist, this could however lead into a highly entertain discussion about Descartes if anyone is interested. He gave us the strongest arguments of skepticism and then thought himself to have dug his way out with his cogito argument "I think therefore I am." I am open to discuss this statement if anyone else is.

Existence

That the question can be asked is proof that there is existence. In what form, for whom and to what end, these then are the questions without provable answers.
Perhaps with the new knowledge in physics and the endless dreamscape, it should now be said that I think, therefore you are.

Just my ideas.

Existence

If life is just a dream there is still a dreamer, so we would exist, even if it is just in that dreamers mind.

Existence

Descartes reasoning for the reality of existence if very simple and actually very similar to a classical early Islamic philosopher called al-Ghazali.

1.I think
2.Thinking is a form of existence
3.Therefore I exist

Classical argument but I have to admit is flawed.

The argument is valid however the the 2nd premise can be critisized as false as it hasnt yet been proved that thinking is a form of existence. At best the argument is extremely inductive.

Not to say we have no existence I believe that existence can most definitely be proved by rational methods, just not this one.

Very similar argument Descartes. In fact I think Descartes believed that life was indeed just a dream. Argument is valid but the premise that dream = existence is false or at least not proved.