The universe doesn't exist, as of now

One thing that makes me laugh sometimes in my head is that people assume everything they are and ever have been.

Why do I need to read Descartes and Heidegger like now? According to other people, I also need to read Nietsche, Aristotle, Hume, Kant, Marx, and other people.

Or I can just go live in the forest.

:smiley:

I like Berkeley and I feel sorry for his sore foot.

You could have fabricated the assertion just as easily as you fabricated the existence of all of the material objects you experience.

No, you should read all of those other guys as well.

All reading philosophy is make me want to stop reading and think entirely on my own.

I am destined to be a rogue thinker.

Or I could just go live in the forest and be happy with the deer and trees and berries and bears.

Then I wouldn’t have to think so much and I’d become Walden, except more awesome.

Then “mind” exists?

What does the fabricating?

(stop while you are ahead…you cannot win)

I can.

Right…right…like the little choo-choo train that could.

Before we can say whether or not a mind exists, you need to define your term.

[yawn]

Mostly because every kind of conversation you could have about it has been done thousands of times already.

It’s a dead horse. Nobody can prove anything beyond a shadow of a doubt. Challenging people to try is unfair. And boring.

I would agree, except that what Descartes does with the topic is interesting: positing “I think, therefore I am” as self-evident, or at least as clear and distinct; and trying to prove God’s existence after that, so he can argue everything’s existence from God’s.

Also, Augustine deals with solepcism in a dialogue I read a long time ago, which dialogue came up with some interesting facts/deductions on learning later on in the text.

And finally, I wonder why the question is not rather put: Am I experienced by others? At least that phrasing is a more sociable form of inquiry ISTM.

The universe exists because it can kill you.

That is a serious possibility and not to be taken lightly.

Of course, some have said there are worse things that can happen to you.

How do you know it can kill you? Have you ever died?

Except you have the tense kinda wrong. It’s not what Descartes does with the topic - it’s what he did with the topic. It’s not that Augustine deals with solipsism, it’s that he dealt with it.

Like I said, conversations that have already been had. Things that have already been said - and, in most cases, better. :sunglasses:

Ever been to an open-casket funeral?

There is a type of philosopher who’s so dedicated to the smartass idea of not taking anythig that’s ever happened as any indication of what could - a version of Hume’s doubts about causality - that they deliberately do things that have proved fatal for others, and things that anyone with a sense of self-preservation would stay away from.

These guys loved their smug cleverness more than their lives. I wish I could remember what they were called, but they didn’t live long enough to conquer the world with this radical belief of theirs.

I’m pretty sure I have seen the present tense used to refer to past quotes before.
After all, knowledge has a somewhat eternal character.

Do you have an English degree or the like to support your position on this?

I just love f*cking around with people.

You give me far too much credit.

:smiley: