Assertions are derived from reality, when you have a thought about something you’re deriving the information about that thought from the universe itself, i.e. you detect, modify your thoughts, hence they exist, hence they are made of a piece of existence itself. The fact that they have to be made of something that pre-exists them demonstrates the tautological effect.
I don’t care what the origins of an assertion are - that is an extraordinarily complex question when you really get into it. But realities are clearly not assertions. “Table”, as a concept, may or may not be an assertion, depending on your philosophical stance. But whatever it is that the concept is referring to is not in itself referential.
Now I know you’re spouting bullshit, its not an “extraordinarily complex question”, it’s fucking simple as pie: Either something exists or it doesn’t, the only way you could know something is there is by casting a ray at it and having it come back to you, (in this case the rays are cast by the sun and atoms themselves) and thereby transmit the information to us from the environment, you need some physics there before you start making unsupportable claims.
I’m sorry but you’re incorrect, in order to label a table, you have to know that a shape of piece of reality exists. A table is merely a piece of reality in a particular shape. All of reality is unified, therefore your objection is still based on the false idea that reality is “seperate” from the mind, it isn’t, the concept of table was DERIVED from reality, the label “table” actually refers to the stored image which you received from the photons via your eyes, therefore “table” is merely a picture of a geometric object that actually exists. Sorry but you are incorrect. Your thoughts are merely reflections of what is, we give those objects names, but those objects are intimately tied to who we are, or else we could not function what-so-ever, you can’t have as much as a single perception if you can’t determine if there is something there or not, it’s bat shit simple.
Try again without the insults and I’ll actually read your whole post.
I insulted you because you weren’t thinking, you butted in with your arrogant comments claiming I was wrong, consider what you said “I don’t care what the origins of assertions are” what kind of person who’s interested in philosophy says such things?
And those whose hearts are fixed on Reality itself deserve the title of Philosophers. (Plato, Republic)
When the mind’s eye rests on objects illuminated by truth and reality, it understands and comprehends them, and functions intelligently; but when it turns to the twilight world of change and decay, it can only form opinions, its vision is confused and its beliefs shifting, and it seems to lack intelligence. (Plato, Republic)
It was you in your own arrogance that made the claim without thinking it through… that in and of itself is insulting. Try thinking before commenting and I won’t insult your intelligence.
Look, I don’t care enough about whether reality is a “self referencing tautology” to waste my time here being insulted.
You certainly cared enough to reply with an incorrect answer. I wonder why that is…
I continue to post on this site out of habit. I’m considering changing my mind.