Do you exist?

[Being1]

If so, can you prove it?

[Arya]

Anyone who claims this proof isn't effective is lying.

Moorean realism. I love it. Unfortunately it doesn't answer the skeptics claims. For example, amputees often experience phantom pains in the body part that has been amputated. The pain is not actually there, but it is real. Hence, if it is possible for pain to be phantom, then it seems that one could feel phantom pain that occurs by being a brain in a vat, or stuck in the Matrix.

Interesting viewpoint.

I still wouldnt like to test out juliod's methods of "proof"... Sounds like it would give me too much of a headache... Sorry juliod!

[McCulloch]

Assume the negative. I don't exist. How can I say that if I don't exist? Contradiction. Therefore, I exist. I have proven to myself that I exist. I have no idea how to prove to you that I exist.

[Arya]

Assume the negative. I don't exist. How can I say that if I don't exist? Contradiction. Therefore, I exist. I have proven to myself that I exist. I have no idea how to prove to you that I exist.

I believe that you have just proven to me that you exist. In a very basic sense, you have sent a signal (the post) and have gotten my attention. By my responding to you I have not only acknowledged your presence, but I am also relaying that information to you.

[Being1]

It could be said that just by interacting with you, as responding to your question and replying, that in itself is proof of your existence.

If you did not exist, then I would not have taken notice of you.

How can you be truly sure that I exist? Is reading a bunch of words on your computer really proof that I exist? Isn't it true that what really exists for you right now is these words on your computer, and the immediate environment that you find yourself in? That is the only thing that you can be completely sure of right now. It is the fact of the matter.

How then did these words appear on your screen?
Who or what created them?
Well, I did. But is it proof that I exist?

[Chad]

Assume the negative. I don't exist. How can I say that if I don't exist? Contradiction. Therefore, I exist. I have proven to myself that I exist. I have no idea how to prove to you that I exist.

That's what I was trying to get at with my first question, but you explained it a lot better, heh.

The brain-in-a-vat idea is intresting. I'm not so skeptic as to consider it though. The phantom limb seems to be explainable through logical means. Here was an interesting part from an article on it:

Researchers at Vanderbilt University recently reported findings that show that phantom limb pain seems to result from the brain's attempt to reorganize itself after an injury. When an injury such as amputation occurs, this results in a major interruption or loss of sensory input from the peripheral limb to the brain As a result, the brain seems to grow new nerve cells in an attempt to "re-wire" its existing pathways of nerve transmission. This builds on recent discoveries in neuroscience that show adult mammalian brains can grow new brain cells - something that was once thought impossible after early childhood.

The researchers at Vanderbilt traced nerve pathways in monkeys after arm amputation. Injectable tracer material was placed into the monkey's chin. Then the brains of these monkey were scanned to find these tracers. These tracers normally would show up only in the area of the brain responsible for sensation to the face. However, in the brains of the injured monkeys these tracers showed up as well in areas of the brain responsible for sensation to the arm and the hand.

This evidence was interpreted as showing that the brain, lacking normal sensory input for the hand and arm, re-routes the pathways to new areas of the brain. Thus the observation that patients report sensation in their lost arm when touched in other areas of their body (in this example - the face). This seems to be an attempt by the brain to heal itself or to "re-connect" broken pathways in some way.

If this new cell growth can somehow be controlled then there might be a way to treat phantom limb pain. More importantly, the new nerve cell growth that occurs in phantom limb pain is very similar to that which occurs in patients when their spinal cords are injured. It is postulated that similar mechanisms occur in many types of neurological injury. If scientists can figure out how to affect and control this process, there may be hope for cures in patients with spinal cord injuries, victims of strokes, etc.

[Arya]

It could be said that just by interacting with you, as responding to your question and replying, that in itself is proof of your existence.

If you did not exist, then I would not have taken notice of you.

How can you be truly sure that I exist? Is reading a bunch of words on your computer really proof that I exist? Isn't it true that what really exists for you right now is these words on your computer, and the immediate environment that you find yourself in? That is the only thing that you can be completely sure of right now. It is the fact of the matter.

How then did these words appear on your screen?
Who or what created them?
Well, I did. But is it proof that I exist?

In my simplistic view upon this subject, the fact that you have typed these messages are proof to me that you exist.

But that creates another aspect to this topic-all I know of you right now are typed words and sentences. In this aspect, you only exist to me as a series of words and sentences, or formalized speech, on a computer screen. I have absolutely no inclination about you beyond the words or a profile that you allow me to view. But I am still aware that you exist.

To be able to converse with you in person (for example) would give me a greater insight into your existence. In that manner I would be aware of not just your written word, I would be able to observe body language. I would be able to interact, and partake of, your existence in a more intimate scenario than the impersonalized manner than this forum provides.

In other words, face to face interaction is a more direct means of communicating-or acknowledging one anothers presence-than simply exchanging written words back and forth.

But on an opposite spectrum-how can one be aware of the existence of a god, when there is no direct communication by either written word or interpersonal contact/communication? How can one justify the existence of an unseen being, when there is no physical proof of it's existence?

I would be interested to hear of your thoughts on this topic, and the original topic as well.

[Being1]

How can one justify the existence of an unseen being, when there is no physical proof of it's existence?

I would be interested to hear of your thoughts on this topic, and the original topic as well.

Is it not true that to all intents and purposes, I am an unseen being to you? And yet you take these words as proof that I exist.

I am the intelligence that brought these words into being.

Is it too greater leap then to say that in this same way, the world itself is proof of the workings of an unseen being, the universal intelligence that brought all things into being?

[Arya]

How can one justify the existence of an unseen being, when there is no physical proof of it's existence?

I would be interested to hear of your thoughts on this topic, and the original topic as well.

Is it not true that to all intents and purposes, I am an unseen being to you? And yet you take these words as proof that I exist.

I am the intelligence that brought these words into being.

Is it too greater leap then to say that in this same way, the world itself is proof of the workings of an unseen being, the universal intelligence that brought all things into being?

It is not a great leap for me at all to sense the workings of an unseen being, a universal being for which all things, living and non-living, organic and non-organic, are connected. But that is through my interpretations of the world/universe and my reasonings of how things came to be, or continue to exist.

There are several different ways to communicate. Many different ways of transmitting information between two different existing beings-regardless of what "form" they may have. The big difference to me is how that information is interpreted (or miscommunicated) between those "beings".

[Curious]

If so, can you prove it?

I can prove it to myself but not to you. You can prove that you exist to yourself but not to me. When it comes down to it, all that we really know is that we have a particular perspective or perception. If we have this perception of self and of our surroundings then we know that the perception, if not the reality of what we perceive, exists. If the perception exists then it follows that the perspective ( and therefore ourself ) exists.

[Being1]

If so, can you prove it?

I can prove it to myself but not to you. You can prove that you exist to yourself but not to me. When it comes down to it, all that we really know is that we have a particular perspective or perception. If we have this perception of self and of our surroundings then we know that the perception, if not the reality of what we perceive, exists. If the perception exists then it follows that the perspective ( and therefore ourself ) exists.

So therefore we can only prove to ourselves that we exist, not to another. Perhaps also we can only ever prove to ourselves that God exists. There can be no mass solutions.