Do we Exist?

Do I Exist?

Originally posted by G.A.O.T.U.
I have a dogwood tree in my backyard. As it grows, its limbs occasionally send branches off from a nodule. Each nodule sends two shoots laterally as the main branch continues along its pre-determined direction.

From this nodule, there are now three shoots that grow. If one of those shoots reaches into the light and can thrive, then it succeeds and continues to grow. If the shoot does not make it into a well-lit area, then that particular section dies and falls off the tree.

This is the nature of progress for a tree. Certainly humans are capable of better decision-making.

G.A.O.T.U.

But yet, our "human decision-making" comes from previous known knowledge that allows us to make that decision. A plant is in it's own way capable of this choice due to the same trial and error by which the original procreator of that decision chose.

Have you ever seen a plant suddenly send it's roots into the sky? while buring it's leaves? In fall plants stop producing chlorophill in their leaves, leaving the accesory pigments. The triggers that cause the plant to begin this chain of events is no different from the human sleep cycle. (sorry, strange analogy)

PLANT
If temperature is equal to (XOOX) and hours sunlight equal to (XXOX), then stop String(chlorophill production)

HUMAN
If daylight hours is equal to (X0X1) and ATP energy level is equal to (S01X), then begin String(whtevr sleep drug is)

or more simply, Cells in both of this equations that record the (X) value reach a certain level within the cell, this causes a DNA code to run that sends a messanger to another cell, when that target cell receives a target value from however many cells participating in that given process, another DNA code causes to cell(s) to begin the given String(X)

the same applies for the plant's sense of up and down, left and right, whether or not to send out a tendral in that given direction.
The cells in your dogwood "decided" to send out 3 different tendrals. You said that certainly huans were capable of better decision making. Are we really better? What do we do with our decision making? If that plant sends out a tendral that does not reach light, it withers and dies, but what if it didn't? If humans are capable of better decision making then should not the plant, by it's asserted place in comparision to humans, begin pumping all the energy it can into that tendral, slowly sapping the plant until the roots themselves die?

After all, the human is the only animal capable of harming itself knowingly, of bringing pain and suffering to himself without cause. A man would not hesitate to kill another for the right price. He would harm others only to make himself a better position, or making himself feel good. I.E. HIGHSCHOOL, THEFT, RAPE, SMOKING, DRUGS, need i say more? Our decision making is the result of uncountable millions of triggers clicking on or off; good and evil, right and wrong, all decided by triggers, and its all in your head.

So do I exist? Am I anything more than a large colony of highly specialized cells that allowed one group of cells to control decision?
Did that decision making simply advance to it's most likely outcome with us?

Our bodies are not our own...

We are the controlled, you can no more stop yourself breathing than you can force your arm to suddenly change colors. Yours, mine, everybody's concept of these things, our ideas on right and wong, are created by those triggers "somehow" firing enough and sending signals that become thought.

Therefore, if everything than could be considered existance exists in our minds, and our minds are nothing more than one really F*^king big boolean trigger - then everything that we perceive is boolean.

And boolean is used as a rudimentary A.I. term.

How can you prove yourself different from your plants? Your plant uses the small boolean to make it's decisions.

jimmerb83

whoa. thats sum deep sh*t right there. u think too much

Do I Exist?

It is better to have thunk that you can think you thunk about thinking, and that by thinking you have thunk, you can give your life sum meaning.

But it still doesn't prove that you exist just because you think that thinking that you thunk that you can think you thunk about thinking, which makes you think your life has sum meaning.

Booyah!

jimmerb83

Ladies and gentlemen, Do I Exist has gone crazy. Please refrain from touching or having eye contact with him. That is all

Do I Exist?

MUWAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHHAAHAHHAHAHAAA

How is that for sum deep sh*t?

oh yeah, i will have the last word, and sumbody is moving in on our forum postings.

Still waiting for you to prove we exist.

jimmerb83

Listen buddy, if you think u dont exist, fine by me! Just let the people who think they do exist live their cute little lives in peace and harmony. i cant prove that we do exist, but u cant prove that we dont exist. this is where we just have to agree to disagree on this one. just remember one thing: curiousity killed the cat.

Do I Exist?

but the evidence is stacked in my favor, for to prove we exist, you must prove man has a soul. But for me to prove we don't really esist as we see ourselves, all I have to do is open a biology book.

jimmerb83

ok so if we dont exist and man cant make decisions unlike any other animal, how can u belive a book written by MAN?

Do I Exist?

because it is a basic truth because in that book you can learn how cells send messages, which ties right back into my earlier revelation of our existing because those cells sending messages make our "thought" but are governed by boolean physics.

Booya

MacLeod

Man has always asked himself that sort of question before D_I_E (interesting acronym)...I've some answers of my own.
Why do u say that our only proof of existing is our soul? A stone can exist just as easily as a man. In this lies the proof of our existance:continuity. Long after you are gone the effects you produced on your environment are still there...its what we call history. It's why the Chinese value what you do more than the way you live-Confucianism n all that. It's why we have families or graves or funeral services...the "program" doesn't end when u die.
But about the soul. Let's continue in the line of your argument:how do we prove man is different from say a plant or an animal? I was posed this question before in school and never found a good answer...I ended up stating we weren't exactly that different in my English Essay Exam. Now though I've chosen to believe in the other side for a reason raised in Star Trek:Nemesis:Mankind is different because we continually strive to further ourselves. Animals can have curiousity:does that take them as far as they need to go? Ours takes us farther than WE need to go! Not only that:we learn, we try, we experiment...we GROW. And that's not just in the physical sense. Only Man wonders about the meaning of his life and strives to do something about it. Only Man looks at the Stars and tells himself he will one day reach them...and we are still trying. We IMPROVE ourselves beyond our original programming-something no other lifeform we know can do. That's the meaning of sentience/self-awareness...

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by Do I Exist?
but the evidence is stacked in my favor, for to prove we exist, you must prove man has a soul. But for me to prove we don't really esist as we see ourselves, all I have to do is open a biology book.

I didn't realize that this was an exercise in proving that we exist. I was responding to your question that asked if we were different than plants.

Do any of us exist? I only have my own anecdotal evidence by which to answer, which is to say that it seems to me that I do. But even if I don't exist, I have chosen to live as if I do.

"Shuzan held out his short staff and said, 'If you call this a short staff, you oppose its reality. If you do not call it a short staff, you ignore the fact. Now what do you wish to call this?' "

G.A.O.T.U.

Do I Exist?

Originally posted by MacLeod
We IMPROVE ourselves beyond our original programming-something no other lifeform we know can do. That's the meaning of sentience/self-awareness...

Finally someone finds an answer to my original question.

But improving beyond our programing is practiced by many other forms of life too, even computers. Though we are only now beginning to give computers that capacity, they nevertheless have in them that capacity to evolve by themselves. And that improving of ourselves in at root growth, and increasing complexity of our neural network, giving us more recorded events in our past to use in the triggers that give us "thought"

So these recorded events that give us our "awareness" are signals that continually refresh in our mind, much like ram.
and when you die those events stop, your thoughts stop, everything simply ceases.

if you exist you must always exist
if you don't you can never come into existance

MacLeod

But D_I_E that's what I mean:sentience isn't exclusive to mankind-AI is the next best possible candidate. Many have mused on how computers operate in ways that mirror our brains. I see no reason to deny a self-aware machine its own rights eg Data or that boy in AI.
Also more on the uniqueness of mankind. We can ponder. We can wonder on the validity of something that evidently will not change if we think on it eg lightning but we still think on it...we can move beyond association-if a light comes on when we recieve food we won't obediantly sit down to eat each time a light comes on (unless we were told to though). We are resourceful too...
Lastly about improving ourselves...is it truly genetic to want to improve? Surely then we would have the same rate of improving ourselves no matter who we are...but we are diverse. Perhaps that too is our distinguishing trait. To be individualistic yet communal. Angry yet calm. Emotional yet Cold...?

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by jimmerb83
I have a theory that things don't have to have an explanation. maybe living things are the way they are for no reason, just because, and us humans are too dumb to figure that out. therefore, out of fear, we make up some explanation to why we exist so we won't feel alone and afraid.

An old fable...

A man named Sei Weng owned a beautiful mare which was praised far and wide. One day this beautiful horse disappeared. The people of his village offered sympathy to Sei Weng for his great misfortune. Sei Weng said simply, "That's the way it is."

A few days later the lost mare returned, followed by a beautiful wild stallion. The village congratulated Sei Weng for his good fortune. He said, "That's the way it is."

Some time later, Sei Weng's only son, while riding the stallion, fell off and broke his leg. The village people once again expressed their sympathy at Sei Weng's misfortune. Sei Weng again said, "That's the way it is."

Soon thereafter, war broke out and all the young men of the village except Sei Weng's lame son were drafted and were killed in battle. The village people were amazed as Sei Weng's good luck. His son was the only young man left alive in the village. But Sei Weng kept his same attitude: despite all the turmoil, gains and losses, he gave the same reply, "That's the way it is."

G.A.O.T.U.

jimmerb83

that is a very meaningful fable,thanks!

Do I Exist?

Originally posted by MacLeod
But D_I_E that's what I mean:sentience isn't exclusive to mankind-AI is the next best possible candidate. Many have mused on how computers operate in ways that mirror our brains.

Also more on the uniqueness of mankind. We can ponder. We can wonder on the validity of something that evidently will not change if we think on it eg lightning but we still think on it...we can move beyond association-if a light comes on when we recieve food we won't obediantly sit down to eat each time a light comes on (unless we were told to though).

We are resourceful too...
Lastly about improving ourselves...is it truly genetic to want to improve? Surely then we would have the same rate of improving ourselves no matter who we are...but we are diverse. Perhaps that too is our distinguishing trait. To be individualistic yet communal. Angry yet calm. Emotional yet Cold...?

First off, I like the nickname, thanks.

Ok here we go, bring over some beers and weed brownies this is gonna take a while.

But we do not "ponder" in that sense, your brain is still sending those signals which when multipied countless times over represent an idea in a boolean equation, your brain compares hot and cold, hot is recorded as at the opposite end of a spectrum from cold. The sequences in your brain soon compare other things in this such way and then building more complex comparisions on top of which yet more build. your brain compares all things in this way the same. Strong and weak, light and dark, love and hate, all simple camparisions.

If pushing a red button makes you happy, and pushing a blue button makes you sad, you will most certainly choose the red button. If the red button suddenly stops makin you happy, then the sequence in you brain does not complete.

If suddenly your brain does not read that oucome which is desired from the sequence, the brain most likely attempts again, and again, until another sequence activates, changing the first, adding a variable for the button to not work.

But our pondering is not unique, it is simply the brain attempting to trim away excessive sequences and correct any boolean errors. The brain must be efficient to work. If it cannot firmly associate one sequence to an action then there is chaos.

try this for me:

Think about abortion, what is the first thing that pops into your mind? Right or wrong, when is a fetus human? Does a women have the right to make that choice? Your brain cannot simply say, "oh, yeah it's up to the woman." or even, "no, it's evil to kill something helpless." There are those sequences that give your those "ideas." It will associate the death of a fetus to the murder of a human, which is associated to and ending of life, which is associated to nothingness, which is associated to a value being false. It is all interconnected together and form your, so-called "ideas." When you think on it your brain is drawing better parallels. After reading this your brain may add another association, "murder, which is associated with pain, which is associated with malice, which is then associated with evil, which is the opposite of what is right and good."

(of course your association tree would be different if you believe it is a woman's choice, this is just a small sample of my own brain's association on this matter, bu everyone has a right to their "opinion")

back on your light = food analogy,
I cannot remember the professor, but he did an experiment that showed that if a dog associated food with the sound of a can opener, then the dog salivated whenever he heard the sound. I see the point you are making here. But as long as we get food every time the light comes on there is no variable in place for us to consider not getting food. Your brain may scout out that possibility because there must always be an opposite possible outcome for every outcome, but your brain also attaches to that outcome a sequence that is associated wih it's idea of "rare" as in not often or not at all.

If you were not hungry then your brain places that variable as false, then you may eat a little, or if your sequence is faulty, you may still gourge yourself. Also if you associate food with happiness then that sequence is set as true and you are happy when you eat. (often the case with overweight, unhappy, socially shunned people. you know what i'm talking about.)

The sequences in people are different because of the input that built them, and any inherited defects or advancements. But the "thoughts" are still created by the same process in everything.

And as for the da*m rock that sumone else said exists. A rock does not exist. It is a concentration of the atoms which are formed by protons, nuetrons, and eletrons, formed by mesons, and quarks, and whatever else we have recently discovered. (I need to get back into the science circle, I have taken an extended leave of absence.)

Our brains must associate a tag to that thing we perceive, rock is simply it's given name, the rock itself does not exist.

Name is but an accesory of this strange thing we consider reality.

Ok, i'm tired of typing though i was going to address the computer thing. I'm pretty sure you can catch my drift though so whater i was going to say about it is implyed because they use these same sequences that we program them too.

jimmerb83

I still don't get it, sure we 'ponder' and make decisions by associating outcomes w/ good and evil or ture and false, but what about our sense of being. surely i am not the only one to have this feeling. this feeling of being in control, knowing i am here, and so on. Is this my spirit? or is my brain simply on a quest for knowledge, creating inside my head a false identity, making it believe it is real.

Spirits are the thing i ponder. what is a spirit? is it a thin whitish mass that floats around? or is it simply energy? and who's to say there is only one spirit per body. what if there are thousands of spirits within me right now? spirits dont have personalities or thought processes, they can't make me move my right arm, or blink, it is simply the brain that does this. i could have 2 or 200 within me right now. or i could have none, i could just be a creation that is simply able to 'ponder' these things.

but even after this there is still my sense of being. where does this come from. i KNOW i am experiencing this right now, and i feel like i DO exist. You look at a rock. a rock is nothing, like you said. it doesnt move, or eat, or breath. but you look at an ant. an ant can move and breath and eat. but does the ant know it's there? does the ant have a sense of BEING. or is it only us humans that have that.

maybe this sense of being that we all share is a flaw, a mistake. God or whatever you want to call it just wanted to play with his toy, watch us fight and make love, not have us sit quietly for hours pondering who is out there and why we feel the way we feel. or maybe it is just i who has this feeling, maybe i am the only one who actually DOES exist, everyone else is just masses of energy. what if we are all part of a dream, an idea of some other's being, and the only way this hellish nature that we so called 'live' in will only end when that thing wakes up, or forgets about us.........

MacLeod

Say again guys? I dinnae catch your drift but I'm guessing you want to verify the existance of the soul...is that right? That nothing in our brains controls it? Frankly I dun quite believe in the soul. Everything seems to be explainable in terms of the movement of electrons in one's mind...
Yet this is a case of theory versus reality:spend enough time outside and one finds it hard to believe humanity isn't driven my mere physics. Deja vu, pre-cognition,...I wish I remembered but there are many things out there that seem to insist on there being something more in our psyche. For example the connection some twins have? This is where some part of me still believes there is something spiritual and worth developing in our minds than being mere machines or animals.
But about the rock I still dun get wat u mean about it not existing. Existing to me merely means "being there"...electrons or protons or not it is still there-you can't say you can walk right trhough a rock, yes?
Also about the association-I dun think so. Gimme a red/blue button scenario and I'll try both...but dun we? We try swimming sometime in our lives and hate it but something tells us to go right into it some other time just to tell ourselves we can handle it? To remind ourselves what suffering and being tough means? We aren't just creatures who will accept a situation unquestioningly-our ego demands we find an answer. The MeroVingian knew that and presented the situation with the cake where the woman's logical mind eventually caves in under the sheer pressure of pure physical sensation...but I won't doubt that she'll not even wonder at it later? That is indeed a function of the mind but isn't that a sign of an advanced intellect? Still if you're looking for proof of the soul well...keep searching.

Lastly GAOTU that's a good one...I haven't heard that fable from since I was young. How'd u remember the name?

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by Do I Exist?

try this for me:

Think about abortion, what is the first thing that pops into your mind? Right or wrong, when is a fetus human? Does a women have the right to make that choice? Your brain cannot simply say, "oh, yeah it's up to the woman." or even, "no, it's evil to kill something helpless." There are those sequences that give your those "ideas." It will associate the death of a fetus to the murder of a human, which is associated to and ending of life, which is associated to nothingness, which is associated to a value being false. It is all interconnected together and form your, so-called "ideas." When you think on it your brain is drawing better parallels. After reading this your brain may add another association, "murder, which is associated with pain, which is associated with malice, which is then associated with evil, which is the opposite of what is right and good."

I would like you to now run the same thought exercise -with the same subject matter- for my dogwood tree.

I would also like to hear about my dogwood's concept of "evil".

G.A.O.T.U.

exulto

"I think, therefore I am." Descartes'

texabara

What is existence?

What is the knowlege of existence?

I know I exist...but...How do I know that?

Do an animal know it exist? If it don't...Why they try to survive?

Danger and fear confront us with the reality of stop to exist. We mourn our dead people because they remember us we will cease to exist. Arqueologist and antropologist support the idea that when a creature start to make funerals and treat there dead with rituals, then, there is one sign of culture.

Culture is the key to understand existence, at least its meaning.

We, humans, are different to animals, because we are created in a cultural environment. Animals are in a natural environment.

Culture is our creation. Culture is what we do. Culture creates us. So, we do ourselves, we create ourselves as subjects.

I'm not saying that culture creates us like clons, for example, but, culture creates us as subjects.

Then, the trace we have of culture action is history. So, diffrerent from animals, we have a record of our actions as society. Of course, history depends on who is making the story, on who tells the story.

Animals and plants do not record their actions, we do, so we know we exist, because we produce our own proof.

Ah! A human can not be reduce to brain cells, we are the sum of them, but more....

We are our actions, the action of exist.

What do you think?

exulto

"Once i dreamed i was a butterfly, and now i do not know whether i am Cho Tzu who dreamed he was a butterfly, or whether I am a butterfly dreaming i am Cho Tzu." Chinese Sage

I think, therefore I am. That is all we really have and know.

texabara

Plants don't think, but they exist.

We are the only ones who need to "know". But knowing it don't make us exist.

The dream of the butterfly contradicts Descartes theory. Dreaming is thinking.

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by Do I Exist?
for to prove we exist, you must prove man has a soul.

Why is this a necessity?

G.A.O.T.U.

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by texabara
Plants don't think, but they exist.

We are the only ones who need to "know". But knowing it don't make us exist.

The dream of the butterfly contradicts Descartes theory. Dreaming is thinking.

Another fable:

***
One day in the morning Chuang Tzu started crying and weeping. His disciples gathered and they said, "Master, what are you doing? What has happened to you?"

Chuang Tzu said, "I am in a fix. Last night I dreamed that I had become a butterfly."

The disciples said, "But what is there to weep and cry and be so sad about? Everybody dreams of many things! Nothing is wrong in being a butterfly in a dream."

Chuang Tzu said, "That is not the problem. Now I am worried, now a doubt has arisen and I don't know now how to reach a conclusion. In the night Chuang Tzu dreamed that he had become a butterfly. Now the doubt has come: it may be now the butterfly is dreaming that she has become a Chuang Tzu."
***

G.A.O.T.U.

Do I Exist?

Thank you everyone. (except G.A.O.T.U. ;-P)

Thank you for telling me something my brains sequences cannot find an contradicting answer to. I think I have finally trimmed that sequence that makes me I. Whether we exist or not, we are here. The rock may not exist but somehow there is something that is me.

I would like this forum to stay open as long as anyone has new ideas or thoughts.

Jimmerb83, you first made me think and thinking has now made me real.

texabara, interesting response to exulto, i see someone has cotradicted an answer to me for me, although gaotu ripped you a new one in his last reply.

exulto, you were the first to actually cut it down to the bare facts, I could learn much from you. I had heard that chinese proverb before but hadn't thought of it, thank you.

MacLeod, You posed me a true problem in answering, (and a rock is a name we give to a collection of atoms, those atoms do not universally form a rock though, thats simply what we see, but humans cannot be accounted for by this i now understand, since there is no question if a rock can think and learn. In the red/blue button i thought it was implyed that you would know the outcome of both through some means, either personal experience or others, or observation.) I liked your ideas even if I sound like a egocentric, condecending...whatever it is that one guy said.

G.A.O.T.U. you were a pain in the a**, but I enjoyed the tree thing, I think you need to reread it though. Just so you know, a plant runs all its sequences inside it's cells universely, a human has the brain to run them and as such can create sequences. a plant can only rerun the one's it's preprgrammed with. being able to learn still doesn't prove we exist, but the others anwered my question. AND NO MORE FABLES I'VE HEARD THEM ALL. I'd love to hear your smarta** retort to my smarta** retort.

oh yeah it's immunitize or immunize, I think...hahh thinking.....exactl the thing I had a problem with but have been doing this whole time. ;-) your last post was o.k., I really did like your retort to texabara.

and if you don't prove man has a soul ( Which I now know is not a nessesity but i'm gonna retort you anyways because I slightly dislike you) then he is nothing but those sequences.

To everyone (EXCEPT GAOTU)

I now think it doesn't matter if we have a soul or not. maybe we can exist even if we are nothing but those sequences.

FREE
YOUR
MIND
AND
QUESTION
REALITY

MacLeod

Wow that's a nice summary and thanks to the rest...sounds like you recieved an Oscar or something :D
Glad you reached your conclusion...heck maybe souls need not be something beyond a brain's signals? Also the word exist is really tricky:I was reading it in the scientific term. Maybe you should have used "sentient"?

And GAOTU:
A man walked up to a monastary. He approached a Monk.
"Hey there-I was thinking of joining Buddhism...what is it makes you folk better in your ways of thought?"
The monk answered "Well, we abstain from meat, smoking, women, drink, gambling..."
Then the man replied in shock "-Then why do you still want to live?"

To each his own path to the answers folks!! :D

Do I Exist?

waht brought on this mid-teenager crisis? read on, maybe you too will be changed forever by htose words if you have not already been so by the other geniuses in this forum.

oh i'm 90% sure it was Final fantasy 9, it had a character named vivi in it who was created from the dregs of souls (he doesn't know this at the time) He questioned his existance throughout the game, why was he created and what was he? when he finally found out he had to accept it and his friends helped him. he was a weapon. He was created to kill. Did he not have a soul then? was he even real? Did he exist? Later on in the same game the main character who helped Vivi finds out that he himself isn't real. He is a living doll. He was made to be the vessal for the soul of an inhabitant of Gai, another world. He believes that means he doesn't have a soul. He goes through this big growth in his own awareness.

but vivi's theme and word on a picture of him that scrolled along with others were simple.

how do you prove that we exist? maybe we don't exist....

those words changed me forever, and i have never been able to look at life the same. and never will, but i can finally find some peace and understanding in it all.

TheRealOne

In some form or another, we all exist. Even delusions, in the eyes of the delusional, exist. For example, many believe that God exists. Perhaps he/she does, perhaps he/she does not. But, it is inarguable that the concept of God exists. It is inarguable that the concept of you exists, whether your being is merely a delusion.

3nity_twisted

But you know.. stuff like this actually does get u thinking, you know?

texabara

I agree with TheRealOne, ideas are actions of our brains, collective or individual. Action is material, at least in our world of materialization. Even God, who for me does'not exist, exist as a concept in the human thinking process.

I think GAOTU was not counter answering me, in fact, he was brilliantly taking down Descartes theory.

But what about the record of history as a proof of existence?
What about culture, oppose to nature, as our way and means of existence?

Can anybody answer?:
What is existence? What is knowledge?
What mean the knowlege of existence for you?

I tryed to answer that, exposing the game of culture, action, and history...

What do you think?

exulto

Do I exist?-- That was definetly the sweetest reply anyone's posted....acknowledging everyones contribution like that... i was almost in tears.........

(just joking bout the tears)

GAOTU- i don't see how the chinese proverb and Descartes' theory contradict each other. But anyways.......

I think Macleod is right about how we define existence.... i think everyone has there own understanding and appreciation of it...as was shown by the way the monk lived and the way the other guy lived.Who had the better understanding of existence?Which existence is superior-the life of the monk or the ordinary guy. We can't say. Each life has its own purpose. The way chooses you.You do not choose the way.

How do i know that i exist? Philosphers have devoted their entire lives trying to answer this same question...... how can I in my 19 years on this planet do any real justice to it. I do exist. I exist not only because i think, but because i am aware and i feel... Pain and hurt and even happiness make you realize how real you actually are. If emotions,consciousness and thoughts are insufficient proof of existence what about others. Your existence is endorsed and is affirmed by your relationships with others...... when someone dies..a life is gone forever....someone mourns for that lost life.

What is knowledge? It is difficult to define knowledge. I think that knowlege is truth and experience. But even truth can be so relative and bias. I think knowledge is actually just information.
I think that wisdom is far more superior than knowledge. Wisdom and knowlegde are not co-dependant... i think that you can have wisdom with very little knowledge.

MacLeod

So glad someone agrees :D and very well put-if we keep thinking everything as proof that a soul doesn't exist and never stop to think what exactly might be the proof then we'll all dwell in gloom and emptiness...we'll lose sight of our goal. That's a common philosopher's failing:cynicism. Let's all remember to take all that thinking with a large dose o' salt! :D

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by Do I Exist?

G.A.O.T.U. you were a pain in the a**, but I enjoyed the tree thing, I think you need to reread it though. Just so you know, a plant runs all its sequences inside it's cells universely, a human has the brain to run them and as such can create sequences. a plant can only rerun the one's it's preprgrammed with. being able to learn still doesn't prove we exist, but the others anwered my question. AND NO MORE FABLES I'VE HEARD THEM ALL. I'd love to hear your smarta** retort to my smarta** retort.

Another fable, sorry:

Nan-in, a Japanese master, received a university professor who came to inquire about his teaching. Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor's cup full, and then kept on pouring.

The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. "It is overfull. No more will go in!"

"Like this cup," Nan-in said, "you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you anything unless you first empty your cup?"

G.A.O.T.U.

texabara

To exist I must empty myself?

At least, in marial arts, to survive, I must learn to empty my mind.
If you enter a conflict thinking on something, like, "I am going to do this or that", you start loosing the confrontation against yourself.

May be, emptyness, is the real self. But, I still think, the human condition is "to be subject of".

Ah!
How can you take advantage of wisdom, if you don't know how to?
In Matrix, NEO start to know, and then, became wise. You use wisdom if you "know".

Knowlege is power, and wisdom is the way you use that power.

But, I insist...History is the proof of my existence!

Maybe, comrades, you still think history is something that belongs to a high school and very boring class.

But history is the face of the present. Think of it in terms of the things you do in a day. When you think of yourself...do you think on what you haven't done yet?

OR DO YOU THINK ON WHAT YOU DID?

the past is fact. the present always pass exactly the moment you think of it, and the future is only speculation.

Ah! GAOTU...I like those fables!

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by texabara
But history is the face of the present. Think of it in terms of the things you do in a day. When you think of yourself...do you think on what you haven't done yet?

Let's try a more straightforward quote this time from a friend of mine who contemplates these subjects far better than me and arrives at ideas that I enjoy.

"I am what I did. I will be what I do."
-J. Marshall

G.A.O.T.U.

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by Do I Exist?
waht brought on this mid-teenager crisis? read on, maybe you too will be changed forever by htose words if you have not already been so by the other geniuses in this forum.

{snip}

how do you prove that we exist? maybe we don't exist....

Thinking is for those who wish to think. Being is for those who wish to exist.

If you wish to be a slave to your thinking, then continue to pursue an intellectual "proof". If you choose this route, you will never be satisfied. You will remain a hungry ghost, trapped in this world. If you wish to exist, then go and exist.

The act of asking "Do I exist?" suggests that you do. However, until you experience existence, you will have no proof.

Stop thinking; start being. Your proof will follow.

But be patient...

G.A.O.T.U.

MacLeod

GAOTU there's more to life than one side. Thinking and being must balance for there's an importance to each side. Being allows you to seize the moment. Thinking allows you to ponder about it later...to live in more than the present like some instinctual animal. And about fables-bring it on!

The legendary swordsman Musashi walked to a narrow bridge that was the only way across a river. On the opposite end was another skilled swordsman. They halted on their respective ends. Musashi was the first to speak.
"It appears we both want to cross this bridge, and that it is too narrow to accomodate us."
"I agree." Said the other.
"The solution is simple:the less-skilled of us both must give way to his superior. Thus kindly step out of the way."
"That I do not agree with." he replied.
"Then you challenge my superiority?" Musashi called out.
The other man merely brought his sword forward. Musashi followed, and they stood where they were on their ends of the bridge, observing each other and waiting for the first move in the deadly duel that would ensue.
Minutes later (some say hours) both straightened and released their grips on their weapons. With a bow of respect, both turned and walked away from the bridge, equals in a bloodless battle.

...Guess the moral!

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by MacLeod
Minutes later (some say hours) both straightened and released their grips on their weapons. With a bow of respect, both turned and walked away from the bridge, equals in a bloodless battle.

...Guess the moral!

***
Once the monks of the eastern and western Zen halls were quarrelling about a cat. Nansen held up the cat and said, "You monks! If one of you can say a word, I will spare the cat. If you can't say anything, I will put it to the sword." No one could answer, so Nansen finally slew it. In the evening, when Joshu returned, Nansen told him what had happened. Joshu, thereupon, took off his sandals, put them on his head and walked off. Nansen said, "If you had been there, I could have spared the cat."
***

Part of the samurai code required that a warrior never return a drawn sword to its scabbard unless it had drawn blood. If he did not draw the blood of his opponent, he was required to draw his own.

I have not drawn my sword, nor do I see a reason to...

G.A.O.T.U.

MacLeod

That sounds familiar-ever read Dune? A fremen's dagger(kris) cannot be sheathed until it has tasted blood...except its is also coated with a deadly poison. Makes u think twice before drawing it!

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by MacLeod
That sounds familiar-ever read Dune? A fremen's dagger(kris) cannot be sheathed until it has tasted blood...except its is also coated with a deadly poison. Makes u think twice before drawing it!

Funny you should bring up Dune in this thread. Here is the Bene Gesserit "Litany against fear":

"I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past me, I will turn to see fear's path. Where the fear has gone there will be NOTHING. ONLY I WILL REMAIN."

Fear is a function of "thinking". "Remaining" is the key to existing.

Nietzche would agree, too, I think. He is quoted as having said, "That which doesn't kill us makes us strong."

Does this suggest a difference in the decision-making efforts between plants and humans? Plants steer clear of pain, humans can see the value in it and perservere.

Paul Atriedes is tested with the gom jabbar in the first Dune to see if he was human. He passed the test and eventually became the Kwisatz Haderach, a sort of "One" with unique powers. Perhaps Neo could just use a little spice...

Thinking about Matrix and Dune similarities, it was the original "testing" of Paul's mother the Lady Jessica by the Bene Gesserit in the first place that exposed Paul to spice causing him to become the Kwisatz Hederach, a person whom all Bene Gesserit feared above all others.

The Agents in M1 first approached Anderson in his office causing Morpheus to make the first personal contact with Anderson. Smith made a mistake when he used Matrix techiques to bind Anderson's mouth when they inserted the tracking device.

Another contemporary similarity in theme is with the first Terminator. By sending the terminator back in time to kill Sarah Connor so she couldn't give birth to the liberator of humans (another "One"), they caused Kyle Reese to go back in time. Kyle, of course, became John Connor's father.

It is interesting that we often cause that which we most fear to come into being by trying to avoid it. This indeed points out the failures inherent in pure boolean "thinking".

G.A.O.T.U.

freeyourmind

I think before we can start posing ideas and interesting theories we have to define existence. What is real? And more importantly, does it matter, or de we just make the most out of what we got?

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by freeyourmind
I think before we can start posing ideas and interesting theories we have to define existence. What is real? And more importantly, does it matter, or de we just make the most out of what we got?

The following quote is from The Philosophy of Freedom by
Rudolf Steiner (1894). The words are from chapter 5 "The Act of Knowing".

While these are the most pertinent ideas related to the present discussion, the whole chapter should be read in full. It is a long chapter, but well worth the read.

It does a great job of talking about the differences I have attempted to describe contrasting the ideas of "thinking" and "being" or "knowing" as Steiner describes below:

In thinking, we have that element given us which welds our separate individuality into one whole with the cosmos. In so far as we sense and feel (and also perceive), we are single beings; in so far as we think, we are the all-one being that pervades everything. This is the deeper meaning of our two-sided nature: We see coming into being in us a force complete and absolute in itself, a force which is universal but which we learn to know, not as it issues from the center of the world, but rather at a point in the periphery. Were we to know it at its source, we should understand the whole riddle of the universe the moment we became conscious. But since we stand at a point in the periphery, and find that our own existence is bounded by definite limits, we must explore the region which lies outside our own being with the help of thinking, which projects into us from the universal world existence.

Through the fact that the thinking, in us, reaches out beyond our separate existence and relates itself to the universal world existence, gives rise to the fundamental desire for knowledge in us. Beings without thinking do not have this desire. When they are faced with other things, no questions arise for them. These other things remain external to such beings. But in thinking beings the concept rises up when they confront the external thing. It is that part of the thing which we receive not from outside but from within. To match up, to unite the two elements, inner and outer, is the task of knowledge.

http://www.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA004/TPOF/pofc5.html

As the author writes, we [i]seem[i] to have two "sides". However, that is the illusion. These sides are all part of the same being. Seeing them separately causes the doubt that results in the question "Do I exist?"

The Act of Knowing answers the question beyond all doubt.

Those who doubt that they exist don't need to worry too much about it. They don't exist.

Those who really want to exist have simply but to put forth the effort and simply exist.

G.A.O.T.U.

exulto

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

I am glad that you have finally arrived at this place of knowing.The path of mystery leads inwards.

MacLeod

Bravo GAOTU very well done!! Very refreshing views and things I'll definitely stay up tonight thinking of...to exist we merely have to trust in existing!
More parallels:sending the Terminator back may have created John Connor but it accelerated Skynet's creation with the fragments of the T-800...
Dune featured a war between machines and the humans they enslaved-the Butlerian Jihad. That's why the "current" Dune-ers are far removed from complicated non-organic technology-no AI, no computers-not even long distance phones...

freeyourmind

originally posted by Pope Pompous Pilot
Those who doubt that they exist don't need to worry too much about it. They don't exist.

Those who really want to exist have simply but to put forth the effort and simply exist.

I don't understand what you're saying here.
Is the definition of existence the belief in one's existence? That just doesn't sound right.
I think the question is not whether something exists or not, but rather whether something exists as what we think it does.
The matrix does exist, not as the real world, but as a program.
The cat Neo sees in M1 does exist, not as an animal, but as a program.
If I don't exist as myself, then I must exist as a figment of someone's imagination or an intricate illusion. Figments of imagination and illusions do not have free will, and I do. So maybe whatever has free will, must exist?
If that is true, then you can only ever be sure of your own "existence". Nothing else is for certain.
Look at it this way:
I think, therefore I am me.

G.A.O.T.U.

Originally posted by freeyourmind
I don't understand what you're saying here.
Is the definition of existence the belief in one's existence? That just doesn't sound right.
I think the question is not whether something exists or not, but rather whether something exists as what we think it does.
The matrix does exist, not as the real world, but as a program.
The cat Neo sees in M1 does exist, not as an animal, but as a program.
If I don't exist as myself, then I must exist as a figment of someone's imagination or an intricate illusion. Figments of imagination and illusions do not have free will, and I do. So maybe whatever has free will, must exist?
If that is true, then you can only ever be sure of your own "existence". Nothing else is for certain.
Look at it this way:
I think, therefore I am me.

This post contains the word "think" three times and the word "exist" seven times.

You unconsciously know that "thinking" is much less important than "existing". So stop your "thinking" and start Existing.

I use the word "thinking" in quotations like that to demonstrate the type of brain work that applies preferences and paradigms to the observations and inputs of the mind and body. All things exist regardless of how we "think" about them.

The Matrix is a metaphor for the illusionary nature of the world. When you see a blue vase, you do not actually see a blue vase. Your eye receives light waves bouncing off of the surface of the vase in certain patterns and at certain wavelengths, some of which the human eye can record and others that it can't. Your brain then takes the information and "processes" it through a whole variety of filters that are unique to your brain. These filters are as transient, ephemeral and illusionary as the Matrix. They are all inventions of your "thinking".

The vase, however, exists completely outside of your "thinking". It continues to exist even when you are no longer observing it with your eyes and processing the information by your "thinking" brain.

Worrying about whether the vase exists or not is futile. Worrying about whether you exist or not is futile. Either you exist or you don't. If you exist, then go exist. If you do not exist, then you should probably stop bothering everyone else who does exist. ;)

Ultimately, if you can ask the question. "Do I exist?" you probably do. So stop "thinking" and start Existing. (capital E fully intended)

G.A.O.T.U.
aka Pope Pompous Pilot

freeyourmind

So to sum it all up, it doesn't matter why we exist. It matters what we do with our existence.
Right, Mr PPP?

MacLeod

Darn u jus confused me. I was talking in terms of the meaning "Do I Exist" posted on "exist", not my original idea as well of merely "being there". Think of the word more as "sentient"...maybe talking about the soul. At least that's what i assume he means. So basically, if beings say in your dreams act as if they have a mind of their own or even go to the extent of developing a personality (however hard that can happen) they can in a sense exist....not in your terms that is. Sadly that kind of existance ends when the dream ends...but it was there to begin with. Similarly if the world were actuality revealed to be one huge dream I wouldn't have felt my existance as wasted or false- in a sense we have existed. I need merely have the sense to ask myself about it to know I exist-nothing else can do that. Similarly, I feel a machine, if it did that, will be said to exist. To have a soul. This is, in a sense, much neater dun u think?
Then, I believe also that I am not the only person to exist. I know I do, but that is not proof against others existing:in fact it is proof they do. It is too selfish to presume otherwise.

GAOTU I can't quite stand on the same view on things as you. Merely existing without thought is to lack change, improvement, Meaning. Sure scientists and philosophers dun have the answers but they have one vital thing to teach:never stop thinking. I dun mean over-thinking of course, but thinking, questioning, wondering, pondering...all these may lead us nowhere closer to answers but they do make up humanity. Our humanity. Socrates drank poison because of his thoughts but hey it did some good. It all depends on what we want. If we want to think or not. Dun count the words...anyway I guess we're all free to do what we feel like freeyourmind. Have fun finding (or not finding) your answers!

freeyourmind

Originally posted by MacLeod
Darn u jus confused me. I was talking in terms of the meaning "Do I Exist" posted on "exist", not my original idea as well of merely "being there". Think of the word more as "sentient"...maybe talking about the soul. At least that's what i assume he means. So basically, if beings say in your dreams act as if they have a mind of their own or even go to the extent of developing a personality (however hard that can happen) they can in a sense exist....not in your terms that is. Sadly that kind of existance ends when the dream ends...but it was there to begin with. Similarly if the world were actuality revealed to be one huge dream I wouldn't have felt my existance as wasted or false- in a sense we have existed. I need merely have the sense to ask myself about it to know I exist-nothing else can do that. Similarly, I feel a machine, if it did that, will be said to exist. To have a soul. This is, in a sense, much neater dun u think?
Then, I believe also that I am not the only person to exist. I know I do, but that is not proof against others existing:in fact it is proof they do. It is too selfish to presume otherwise.
Doesn't sentient mean able to feel pain?
In that case, humans and animals exist, but plants and most programs don't.
Humans are the only ones who have a soul. So if that's the definition of existence then animals, plants, and machines do not exist.
This argument is getting confusing because we haven't really properly defined what we think "existence" means.
I think existence is the opposite of illusion. What doesn't exist, is a lie. The illusion cannot feel anything, it doesn't have any rights. It wouldn't be morally reprehensible to wrong an illusion. Maybe that's the most important difference between reality and illusion.

texabara

First. Descartes paradigm says that you must think to be...but, to think, in the first place, you must exist. So existence is a precondition of the ability to think. Plants and many animals do not think, but they exist.

Second. As noted by many friends here, and idea, illusionary or real, is an idea, and because of that is an action with consequences, physical, psicological, ideological, etc., and, therefore exist. If it happen, it exist.

Third. In order to know that you exist, which is separated from the fact that you exist, we humans use a thinking process to get to that idea or not. To think, as humans do, we need a social environment to get the tools to think.

We need the "Other" to define ourselves. As you are related to the "Other" in a social bondage, yuo will define your own existence in terms of how you define the "Other" and how the "Other" defines you.

Then, as Fourth, as I have written before, the history of that relationship is the proof of your existence.

And...

Fifth. It doesn't matter if life is an illusion or not, to us that doesn't make any relevance, except, as in Matrix, if that illusion affects your free will.

Lets take our oniric life for example (our life define in dreams). For Freud and sicoanalisys, our oniric life have an impact over our alert and concious life. If you have, lets say, a trauma in a dream, you will be affected in your alert life. So, for that particular siclogical discipline, dreams are as real as real life, making no specific distintion between one life or the other on that terms. Of course, there are distintions, but on other terms.

Then, taking Matrix as our base line, existence will depend on a political situation. Humans inside the Matrix are not living a real life because they are being trapped by an illusion. That illusion keep them thinking they are free, but reallity is that they are slaves. Then, every human connected is not developing their free will or, their full political potential.

Do humans connected doesn't exist? Yes! They exist!
Do their life, in terms of what they do are real? Real only in terms of what they think. Real in the world of ideas, not in the world of material. But they exist!

The problem for humanity in Matrix is not a problem of existence...Is a political problem!

We, I mean, You and I in this forum, have a problem of sociopolitical matters, but we do exist!

If you have a doubt of your existence, ask your friends.

Ah! We do not need a soul to exist...But the soul need us to think on it so it exist. The same with god!

exulto

People...Everything that has been said on this page has already been said on page 2..... i thought we had it... feels like we're regressing on this issue of "Do i exist?" instead of progressing?

MacLeod

Originally posted by freeyourmind
Doesn't sentient mean able to feel pain?
In that case, humans and animals exist, but plants and most programs don't.
Humans are the only ones who have a soul. So if that's the definition of existence then animals, plants, and machines do not exist.
This argument is getting confusing because we haven't really properly defined what we think "existence" means.
I think existence is the opposite of illusion. What doesn't exist, is a lie. The illusion cannot feel anything, it doesn't have any rights. It wouldn't be morally reprehensible to wrong an illusion. Maybe that's the most important difference between reality and illusion.

hey freeyourmind what i mean in my post was the barest bones of all I could find. Having pain and a soul in the way you speak creates different and inaccurate definitions. Animals do not exist if we use th term "sentient" (which I'll now stick to). I'll assume the act of existing means a state that should give something freedom and rights. Now with animals that's pretty clear. With machines though the line blurs. Who are we to say a machine cannot have a soul? Have you seen the replicants in Blade Runner? R2D2 in Star Wars? Data in Star Trek? Bishop in Aliens? Skynet in Terminator? In every respect they are sentient.
Some say they feel cheated when say Bishop got torn apart in the end of the movie and they feel for all appearances they were humans until they were revealed to be machine-so what?! Does that make them any less sentient? Who are we to judge that humans are alone in our form of existance? Do we have to right to condemn a neighbour who has known you all your life because he is revealed to be say, an ex-Nazi who has left that life far behind? OK this is a little far from topic now-my point is we have to be careful of our definition of such a sensitive terminology. It's kinda like why you shouldn't use fahrenheit in physics equations (or do you Americans do?) :p

Exulto apparently the discussion is going on because there are people who do not agree. No definition is perfect especially on this-I'm still struggling with mine.

freeyourmind

Originally posted by MacLeod
hey freeyourmind what i mean in my post was the barest bones of all I could find. Having pain and a soul in the way you speak creates different and inaccurate definitions. Animals do not exist if we use th term "sentient" (which I'll now stick to). I'll assume the act of existing means a state that should give something freedom and rights. Now with animals that's pretty clear. With machines though the line blurs. Who are we to say a machine cannot have a soul? Have you seen the replicants in Blade Runner? R2D2 in Star Wars? Data in Star Trek? Bishop in Aliens? Skynet in Terminator? In every respect they are sentient.
Some say they feel cheated when say Bishop got torn apart in the end of the movie and they feel for all appearances they were humans until they were revealed to be machine-so what?! Does that make them any less sentient? Who are we to judge that humans are alone in our form of existance? Do we have to right to condemn a neighbour who has known you all your life because he is revealed to be say, an ex-Nazi who has left that life far behind? OK this is a little far from topic now-my point is we have to be careful of our definition of such a sensitive terminology. It's kinda like why you shouldn't use fahrenheit in physics equations (or do you Americans do?) :p

Exulto apparently the discussion is going on because there are people who do not agree. No definition is perfect especially on this-I'm still struggling with mine.
Here are the definitions of "sentient" and "exist" according to the Oxford Concise English Dictionary:
Exist: Have objective reality or being.
Sentient: Able to percieve or feel things.
These are the definitions I am using. I don't really understand yours.
I believe that to have a soul means to be able to make a fully independant choice, not based only on your need for survival or on programming. The ability to do anything, even if there's no logical reason for it.
Beings with a soul are the most important. Their lives are worth the most.
Next are the sentient beings, the animals and, hypothetically, programs - or androids. They can feel pain, and are therefore more important that say, plants, but less important than humans.
So, in conslusion, we know we exist as humans with souls because we are fully capable of making choices. So whether or not we are living in a matrix is irrelevant.
I doubt M3 will support this, but this is nevertheless my opinion.
I'm not sure as to what that last bit had to do with anything, but I'm not American, I'm Israeli and we measure in Celsius. Alright?
Happy agent hunting.