Philosophy Now Forum

jackles wrote:the existance that knows it has nothing in its pocket is in its self nothing.so if i say to someone i have nothing in my pocket we both no nothing outside the terms of somthing.as in we share the meaning of non happening in happening.

A case of negation. Ok, thanks for the additional info.

How do these differ? I am curious, because analytic types look to existence, more or less developing on the account found in Frege, and treating existence as a second-order predicate. But those of other persuasions look to being, apparently taking it to be something quite different, and even occasi...

size means the existance of something to the observer .but the observer looking at the innerself realises that the self that is looking has no size.and the object that is being veiwed has only relative size to other objects. I don't follow. Could you clarify? I get that size is relative, I don't ge...

How do you decide whether something can or cannot be part of a simulative world and whether it can or cannot be simulated ? Do you have any criteria ? Do you have any examples to illustrate the two options ? I think the only items of thought we have that can't be limited to a simulative world are: ...

So...everything is real and I shouldn't question what is real or not? That's ridiculous. I should add that by "true reality" I mean "original reality". Dreams are real when we experience them but we cannot be certain that our dreams or even our waking experiences are not a simul...

We could classify existence as: 1. real existence 2. imagined, unreal existence (only taking place in one´s mind) If we agree on this it would not be permissible to say: "The unicorn really exists in my mind". It exists, but not really, it exists only unreally. Instead of real versus unre...

1) If something is indubitably real, then it's reality is absolutely immune to doubt 2) How do we hypothetically doubt the reality of something? If the thing in question could be copied or simulated, then its reality is doubtable. 3) Given 2, that which cannot be copied or simulated is indubitably ...

You are confusing youself too much. Sometimes oversimplifyed logic can confuse, and one should not think too much of it. There's a famous danish play where the main character will tell his mom "mom is a stone, because stones can't fly, ergo mom is a stone", it's a logical phallacy. Things...

I think you misunderstood the point of my question. I asked: Would you say that that which is existent in the mind, is still existent? As in it is a part of existence? I didn't ask if that which exists in the mind is existing in reality or not. The point of my question was to convey that even if som...

HexHammer wrote:Existence might be a brief moment or as long as it's supported by a certain mechanism.

A being is a continaual selfsupported thing/object that exist.

Would you say that that which is existent in the mind, is still existent? As in it is a part of existence?

duszek wrote:Bravo for the courage to offer some product of your own thinking.

Thank you!

Do you use the word "real" in the sense of something like "authentic" or "unique" ? I don't think I've explained well enough what I mean by real. Essentially, I think that if there is existence, then there is reality. Reality can be simulated (dreams, matrix worlds, im...

If you say that everything exists and only nothing does not then we probably need a further distinction between things or items that exist really and those which do not exist really, like dreams, unicorns and the like. Or would you say that a unicorn and a pink elephant exists really ? If a term un...

Before agreeing or disagreeing I would try to find out what you mean by "existence" ? And what are "things" ? Only material things ? Or immaterial concepts too ? And emotions too ? The meaning of existence is a challenge ! :D And an exercise in frustration. :D It is a challenge....

2) How do we hypothetically doubt the reality of something? If the thing in question could be copied or simulated, then its reality is doubtable. I would question this, if something can be copied or simulated, there must be an original that is copied or simulated and that would prove the existence ...