Hey, is existence disprovable? Or, perhaps I’ve missed something here? How would we go about “proving” that we don’t exist? Indeed, even in our attempts to prove that we didn’t, would prove that we did. Because who is that’s doing the proving? Obviously we can’t prove that we didn’t exist if, it required that we exist in order to do so.
So, how do we go about “falsifying” the fact that we exist?
You can’t. That is one judgment you can’t falsify.
You need to read about Descartes…
The following topic will be of interest:
Two Mistakes and Scepticism
And this might be:
questioning opinions
Of course if we can’t falsify this, since it’s only a judgment maintained in our minds, what else can we falsify? Where does that leave science, in its attempts to falsify anything?
One cannot describe absence, pure nothingness. No matter what the charlatan Sartre might say about things.
I don’t think we can falsify existence, but nor do such metaphysical notions need to be falsifiable. Scientific methods have their own problems, but they simply don’t deal with such catch all questions as those of existence.
from the board rules:
ii) Don’t just ask questions. Bring something to the discussion.
Asking “WOAH…LIKE…COULD WE BE LIKE…IN THE MATRIX???” does not make you a philosopher. Honestly. Asking questions is great, as long as you have studied to some extent the topic that you are talking about. Have the decency to go and read some philosophy before asking questions that any old schmoe could ask. There’s no need to try and look cleverer than you actually are, this isn’t a contest. We’re here to educate and be educated.
-Imp
You know when you’ve been Imp-slapped
I had a feeling that was coming
Really, then why attempt to try? Or, did you have something other than “pure nothingness” in mind?
Well, perhaps I get just a little tired of some of these folks explaining that “I” don’t exist.
Ultimately, I think my attempts are to get people to ask if God exists which, is a very personal matter. I mean how can you know if, you can’t see it for yourself?
Have you looked at the topics suggested. Most questions have been covered before. It coud give up more ideas to question and add more to this current topic.
The language I use to try to signify what I’m trying to signify by ‘pure nothingness’ will always fail. But one has to try to use that same language to describe the failure.
I’ve no idea what you are talking about now.
I would enjoy an Imp-slap or two myself.
True. And actually, the question of “existence” when asked in scientific context is not the same when asked in metaphysical context.
Albeit I am perfectly content to experience reality in the way it presents itself to me. This is what validates it and makes it original. I’m not sure, but is this what’s commonly referred to as existentialism?
“You” exist, if thought exists. What “you” are however, is a different matter. For if you are thought, then what is thought? Mind? Well . . . what is mind? Is it judgement, doubt, questioning, assigning values?
And thought changes; does that mean you change? Can you exist without thought? Does thought equate to langauge? If so, is langauge innate? No, but the capacity for language is. So are “you” a capacity for language before you aquire language?
And what about perception? Are you the object you percieve? Is the observer one with the observation? But can’t we observe and, at the same time, think about the observation? Does that mean that we have two different “I” modes? One atop the other? We can also feel and think.
So mind is seperate from feeling. But are we not the feeling just the same? Can’t thought alter my feelings? Yes. So are thoughts in mind more than what we normally concieve of thought to be?
And what about the pause? The pause between the thoughts? Do we exist between the thoughts? Why not? And as what? Perhaps in the perception mode of being. But we don’t think durring the pause, for if we did, it wouldn’t be a pause. Does the thought come after the perception-of-pause? I’m confused? Are you confused? How can one be confused?
Well, have fun.
“I” exist strictly out of the awareness that “I” exist.
Albeit it is necessary for someone to turn on the lights in order to describe in full detail (via language and thought) what’s in the room.
Yes, and some people can talk and chew gum at the same time. 
And without the space between the words, would the words exist?
It’scutethatyoulikethewordalbeitbutseriouslypleaselearntouseitbeforeyouthrowitintoeverysentence.
tihs wluod eb nfu fi I idd otn hvae os mcuh wrok to do. I ma ralely sartnig ot evny tehse yuong mnids.
All be a tit…? What?