Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Sun May 08, 2022 3:46 pm**

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat May 07, 2022 8:34 am Here is the counter to the typical claim that an absolute independent external world exists.

Atla wrote: ↑Sat May 07, 2022 6:58 am After a decade, VA still can't see the mountain-sized error in: "I can only experience the external world through mental models of it, therefore the external world cannot exist".

A smart 10-year-old would spot the non-sequitur in 5 seconds
Strawman!
I had never made the statement,
"I can only experience the external world through mental models of it, therefore the external world cannot exist".

My argument;
1. Reality [A] is all there is.
2. Humans [.B] are intricately part and parcel of reality - all there is.
3. Therefore humans [.B] cannot be absolute independent of reality - all there is [A] - which they are intricately part and parcel of.

"A" in this case is all humans within "B" reality - all there is.
"B" here is indicated with a circular line, reality is an open system without any circular lines.

If anyone is claiming to be very smart,
prove the external world exists absolute independent of humans entanglement, i.e. as standalone by itself, i.e. A being a circle outside the reality [external world] circle B.

That is not a proof. The fact that humans are part of reality does not mean that there exists not an independent reality.

Posted: **Sun May 08, 2022 4:09 pm**

bahman wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 3:46 pm That is not a proof. The fact that humans are part of reality does not mean that there exists not an independent reality.

My argument;
1. Reality is all there is.
2. Humans are intricately part and parcel of reality - all there is.
3. Therefore humans cannot be absolute independent of reality - all there is - which they are intricately part and parcel of.

The main problem with the above is that 2 and 3 are more or less the same claim. So, it's a petitio principii fallacy.
And actually point 1 is included in point 2 also. So, what we really have is a single claim masquerading as some sort of deduction.

Notice further that his diagram shows no intricacy. A really odd diagram to support his argument, especially point 2.
Three it conflates ALL OF REALITY with the possibility of there being things external to us that are not dependent on us.
Yes, we are a part of reality, but is everything dependent on us.
The 'proof' leaves this all ambivalent or more likely not even noticed or wrestled with.

Further note:

If anyone is claiming to be very smart,
prove the external world exists absolute independent of humans entanglement, i.e. as standalone by itself, i.e. A being a circle outside the reality [external world] circle B.

Is ridiculous. He thinks other people have an onus to prove the opposite. This is a very common online confusion. If you cannot prove the opposite of my 'proof' then my proof is correct. No, your proof can be incorrect or unsound or actually just 2 assertions masquerading as three assertions without support. IOW one can point out how his proof fails. One does not have to prove the opposite. One could, for example, not know. A false dilemma.

And, well, the silly,
If anyone is claiming to be smart....do this.

But the funniest is that he claims elsewhere that logical arguments at the universal level have only half truths as conclusions. Apart from the fact that it would be impossible to know, given itself, it means his conclusion here is a half-truth according to him.

Posted: **Mon May 09, 2022 6:17 am**

bahman wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 3:46 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat May 07, 2022 8:34 am Here is the counter to the typical claim that an absolute independent external world exists.

Atla wrote: ↑Sat May 07, 2022 6:58 am After a decade, VA still can't see the mountain-sized error in: "I can only experience the external world through mental models of it, therefore the external world cannot exist".

A smart 10-year-old would spot the non-sequitur in 5 seconds
Strawman!
I had never made the statement,
"I can only experience the external world through mental models of it, therefore the external world cannot exist".

My argument;
1. Reality [A] is all there is.
2. Humans [.B] are intricately part and parcel of reality - all there is.
3. Therefore humans [.B] cannot be absolute independent of reality - all there is [A] - which they are intricately part and parcel of.

"A" in this case is all humans within "B" reality - all there is.
"B" here is indicated with a circular line, reality is an open system without any circular lines.

If anyone is claiming to be very smart,
prove the external world exists absolute independent of humans entanglement, i.e. as standalone by itself, i.e. A being a circle outside the reality [external world] circle B.
That is not a proof. The fact that humans are part of reality does not mean that there exists not an independent reality.

Plainly from the above A is independent of B but that is only apparent.

Mind independence, i.e. the existence of an independent reality or external world is a critical necessity to facilitate survival specific to a period of evolution. The independent external world is a necessity to differentiate where food is from, the avoidance of external threats, looking for spouse and the likes.

But for the purpose of philosophical rigor to facilitate a more refined level of survival into the future, we must recognize the reality that reality-all-there-is cannot by definition be independent from human entanglements.

While the concept of an independent reality does facilitate survival up the present phase of evolution, it is a double-edged sword.
When humans were driven to look outward, they have not looked inward into themselves as part and parcel of reality, note the call 'know thyself'.
The drive for an independent external reality had driven the majority to believe in an illusory God for consonance but that has contributed to loads of evil and potential that will hinder further progress of mankind.

Take the independent god and external reality [paradise] of "the religion of peace" that even sanction the extermination of the human species, for whatever happened the believers are safe in heaven while others will perish in hell.

The concept that humans are entangled with reality-all-there-is will also promote responsible for all individuals to care for the environment they are in, given the threat of global warming, climate change, pollution, etc.

Thus it is a win win for all to counter the dogmatic view, there is no independent reality nor external world at the finest philosophical level of reality.

Posted: **Mon May 09, 2022 2:57 pm**

[/quote]If anyone is claiming to be very smart,
prove the external world exists absolute independent of humans entanglement, i.e. as standalone by itself, i.e. A being a circle outside the reality [external world] circle B.
[/quote]

There are two realities according to science, one is the absolute or ultimate reality and the other is one's apparent reality which is a biological readout of aspects of ultimate reality, those aspects our biology is capable of sensing. According to physics ultimate reality is a place of no things and a place of no things is not what most people would call reality, composed simply of various forms of wavelength frequencies. So, ultimate reality is independent of the consciousness of life, while the apparent reality is biologically dependent on the readout of the effect of the physical world upon it. As Spinoza stated the body is the idea of the mind, through which it comes to know a world.

Posted: **Mon May 09, 2022 3:36 pm**

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 6:17 am Mind independence, i.e. the existence of an independent reality or external world

See, he can't understand that mind independence and an absolutely independent external world are two different things.

To me this is pretty fascinating in a bizarre way. I haven't yet met people who made the above conflation. It comes across as genuinely retarded.

We seem to live in an external world that's not absolutely independent, but is for all practical purposes, by and large, mind-independent.

Posted: **Mon May 09, 2022 5:34 pm**

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 6:17 am
bahman wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 3:46 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat May 07, 2022 8:34 am Here is the counter to the typical claim that an absolute independent external world exists.

Strawman!
I had never made the statement,
"I can only experience the external world through mental models of it, therefore the external world cannot exist".

My argument;
1. Reality [A] is all there is.
2. Humans [.B] are intricately part and parcel of reality - all there is.
3. Therefore humans [.B] cannot be absolute independent of reality - all there is [A] - which they are intricately part and parcel of.

"A" in this case is all humans within "B" reality - all there is.
"B" here is indicated with a circular line, reality is an open system without any circular lines.

If anyone is claiming to be very smart,
prove the external world exists absolute independent of humans entanglement, i.e. as standalone by itself, i.e. A being a circle outside the reality [external world] circle B.
That is not a proof. The fact that humans are part of reality does not mean that there exists not an independent reality.
Plainly from the above A is independent of B but that is only apparent.

Mind independence, i.e. the existence of an independent reality or external world is a critical necessity to facilitate survival specific to a period of evolution. The independent external world is a necessity to differentiate where food is from, the avoidance of external threats, looking for spouse and the likes.

But for the purpose of philosophical rigor to facilitate a more refined level of survival into the future, we must recognize the reality that reality-all-there-is cannot by definition be independent from human entanglements.

While the concept of an independent reality does facilitate survival up the present phase of evolution, it is a double-edged sword.
When humans were driven to look outward, they have not looked inward into themselves as part and parcel of reality, note the call 'know thyself'.
The drive for an independent external reality had driven the majority to believe in an illusory God for consonance but that has contributed to loads of evil and potential that will hinder further progress of mankind.

Take the independent god and external reality [paradise] of "the religion of peace" that even sanction the extermination of the human species, for whatever happened the believers are safe in heaven while others will perish in hell.

The concept that humans are entangled with reality-all-there-is will also promote responsible for all individuals to care for the environment they are in, given the threat of global warming, climate change, pollution, etc.

Thus it is a win win for all to counter the dogmatic view, there is no independent reality nor external world at the finest philosophical level of reality.

This is not an argument but separate and unrelated statements.

Posted: **Mon May 09, 2022 8:31 pm**

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 6:17 am Thus it is a win win for all to counter the dogmatic view, there is no independent reality nor external world at the finest philosophical level of reality.

Would there be one at a less fine level of reality? Does the phrase finest philosophical level of reality have any meaning?

Philosophy Now Forum

There is no Absolutely Independent Reality

Re: There is no Absolutely Independent Reality

Re: There is no Absolutely Independent Reality

Re: There is no Absolutely Independent Reality

Re: There is no Absolutely Independent Reality

Re: There is no Absolutely Independent Reality

Re: There is no Absolutely Independent Reality

Re: There is no Absolutely Independent Reality