The universe doesn't exist, as of now

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

I just realized something.

The burden of proof is on the positive assertion. A positive assertion is one in which somebody says that something IS.

People say the universe is. Therefore, the burden of proof is placed on them.

So, masses. Prove that the universe is.

2

::mrn throws foam brick at shaneytiger:: That feel real?

Another principle is that extraordinary theories require extraordinary proof.
That there is no universe requires better proof than there is not an illusion of matter.

3

I find it much more extroardinary to assume that there is something, completely random, totally unexplained, origins unknown, unrealized, that we randomly assume than to say that we are just imagining it.

4

Completely random? Is there no science?

5

No, because the universe doesn’t exist.

:smiley:

6

Um, I think you need to define “universe” “Is” and “prove” first since so those words could mean about oh I don’t know 80 bajillion different things.

7

You just positively asserted imagination. Prove that the imagination is not something completely random, totally unexplained, origins unknown, unrealized, that we randomly assume. The burden of proof is on you.

8

Actually, that “burden of proof” thing is just an agreed-upon convention we use to try and be fair when making decisions.

It’s not a property of the universe or anything, and there’s no law that says the burden-of-proof is on the assertion instead of the refutation.

Usually, and I’m reffering to “rules of debate” here, the burden of proof is on the claimant who’s contradicting the widely held assertion.

If the widely-held assertion is that the universe exists, then the burden of proof is on the claimant who’d refute it.

Oh, and radical scepticism is boring :slight_smile:

9

I agree with essentially everything written here.

And yeah, Cartesian doubt is about as much fun as Marxism.

10

Why?

11

Because it can’t be defeated. It’s asking for something impossible. We can admit it as a limitation of our knowledge or say its meaningless, but there is no way to solve the problem. So why bother spending time on it?

12

Sounds like an assertion to me. Can you prove it?

13

Most people I know upon reflection will accept the following propositions:

  1. All of the persons tha I know say that we exist in a universe.
  2. Every person I know is part of the class people.

Those may be two assertions, but so is everything. I find them worthy of acceptance, but you may not. Of course, I imagine if I could truly read your mind most of the day, your thoughts would contradict your doubt. So either you wouldn’t really be doubting or your life would be completely hypocritical.

Of course, we are both making the same point.

14

Does it really matter? If the universe doesn’t exist, then you probably wouldn’t have made this thread. Really.

Besides, if the universe didn’t exist then you’d make your own. And since I’m writing this from my perspective, that means you are within my personal universe, which means that the universe you said didn’t exist actually does exist =D> . You follow? (I don’t know if I did…)

I’m afraid that I take an Existential/Descartes position on these kinds of questions. You’re there, that’s all that really matters. Besides…all a Universe needs to exist is just one object, so therefore, if you exist, so does the universe. And, as Descartes said, “I think, therefore I am.” And I assume that you think, since your posted on this forum.

15

assuming we belong to something, how far have we come versus where we should have made it to by now.

we’ve been to outerspace and the moon, but still have poverty, class warfare and religious intolerance.

man has serious issues to resolve, yet billions go into research for erectile dysfunction.

we need to pick up the pace and start solving the bigger issues.

16

I don’t know what Existentialism or Descartes think, but I kind of share that. In a sense, it doesn’t matter whether or not the universe actually does exist, because regardless you are living here, so do what you do.

I just like debate.

:smiley:

17

Whoa you made like infinity million normative judgments there, whoa.

18

Debate is fun and healthy! It’s just a debate that seems to never really go anywhere. The only proof that there is a universe is that we experience it. It’s an empirical observation and thus a) contingent b) subject to error. There’s just no way around it. Unfortunately, it’s kind of the first empirical judgment we have to accept - there is something. If we don’t agree to agree on this point, about the only philosophical debate one can have is one regarding the empty truths of logic and math.

19

P.S. You need to read yourself some Descartes and some Heidegger like now.

20

I’m not sure the universe exists…but I’m sure that statement exists. If I am mistaken and it is an illusion…then I am certain of the illusion.

When Berkeley was refuted by his buddy who kicked the rock, it wasn’t the kicking of the rock that proved it existed, but rather Berkeley’s own presence to his assertion and the fact that he made it, that proved something existed. Again, if even the assertion was an illusion, Berkeley is then aware of the illusion and it therefore exists.