Existentialism has a place among rational thought, but it serves no purpose to try to prove the nothing exists and never did, nor ever will.
I agree with cosette. Reality is always subject to interpretation and argument, but I'm real. People in my life are real. I've been to real places. Even dreams are "real." They may not be part of the material world, but they exist. As do thoughts, ideas, etc.
Here's one for you, Dg, who are you without your thoughts? Can you get to a place and not have thoughts, and just "be?" That boils it all down to existing because we exist. Can you get to that place by going beyond thoughts and just "be?"
You are making assumptions about the reliability of your senses which have not (at least in this thread) been justified. So is cosette, which is I think what she missed when posting in this thread.
I believe that thoughts are a function of the brain. I think as long as a brain is alive and conscious it will have thoughts, or if you can completely clear your mind of conscious thoughts it's not for very long at a time, at least not without considerable training.
To address your question specifically, I don't believe I am identical to my thoughts, therefore without my thoughts I am still me. I can't explain what I am in much more detail than that, but the fact that I am is one which I cannot dispute. However I am looking for a sound justification for believing that other people exist independently of me.
Now you're playing semantics. "Balance, equilibrioception, or vestibular sense is the sense which allows an organism to sense body movement, direction, and acceleration, and to attain and maintain postural equilibrium and balance."
Hi Dg: If there is no "self" to make meaning of "reality" there is, no "self" to consider "solipsism." So I think we have to go back and consider Descartes quote: cogito ergo sum, I think therefore I am. Hmmm?
"I think therefore I am"; presumably whatever the word 'I' refers to in this quote is the 'self' which the solipsist claims is all that exists. Descarte seems to arrive at the existence of one's self as a self-evident fact which cannot be denied.
Dg: Only if "it" can be sensed and made meaning of by self. Of course the reality of "all" is indisputable...but if there is no conscious self, there can be no "awareness" of that reality. Solipsistically ( there is no reality but self) speaking, if the self doesn't exist nothing exists....even tho absolute reality "IS."
Dg: I am pissed! I spent about 15 minutes composing an answer to your questions. Because I am using dialup...arghhh, I lost my connection and, of course, everything I wrote was lost..:-( I ain't gonna do it again..sorry. sorry :-(
if a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound? yes. its ability to make a noise is not dependent on the presence of a hearing creature. i mean if a phone rings and no one is home, it still makes a noise.
In the Christian faith, God is defined as follows: All Powerful, All Knowing. Good, Omnipresent, Loving, etc. etc. But when you put that definition beside the rest of Christian theology, it doesn't work. It contradicts....
I firmly subscribe to Decarte's formulation: I think therefore I am. Some folks on Hubpages argue against this by saying: I am therefore I think.The idea that objective entities exist outside of the mind, have been...