[meteorite-list] On the other hand...

From: Jason Utas <meteoritekid_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 08:01:23 -0700
Message-ID: <93aaac890908250801t10404107h379960d4e46e89ec_at_mail.gmail.com>

Hola Eric, Rob,

> Like I said it's endless... I guess I'm not smart enough to figure out if
> we're really real or not, but that's not "really" what I care about. I care
> about knowledge. That's what I seek in my never ending quest for
> understanding.

Pfft - it's just being able to stand back - and being willing to look
at things from a different angle.
Props for the knowledge bit though; not everyone's willing to say that.

> Now regardless of the reality of our own existence, knowledge is real.

If you're going to *assume* that to be true to back up your argument
that we're real, then you're just using circular reasoning.

If we're assuming that matter can't be proven real, and knowledge is a
construct of non-real material minds, then there really is nothing to
say that knowledge is the least bit real. See Rob's analogy where he
references The Matrix.

> We are conscious, aware, and we think?
> Someone said that already though didn't
> they, a guy that was probably way smarter than me. A quick search and I
> realize it was Rene Descartes that said it first.
> Matter does exist, or rather we perceive the effects of matter to be
> measurable. Even if it is only in our minds. We see it, touch it, feel it,
> experience it, mold it, form it, and in some cases are controlled by it and
> surrounded by it.
> Does it matter? ;) Yes. because if matter isn't real, then your argument is
> moot. And if your argument is moot, then it doesn't matter, because our
> perception of the effects of matter is one that not only makes it exist, but
> makes it measurable. Does that make sense?

I thought Rob's main point was that there's no proving that matter
exists. What you seem to be saying is that from a perceptual point of
view, the question is irrelevant, because we observe "matter" and
because our observations of matter "makes it measurable." Not sure
exactly what you mean there, but I'm assuming that you're talking
about the perceived regularity in the behavior of matter we can
observe...?

This is nothing more than a philosophical argument, though. Yes, for
all intensive purposes, for humanity's sake, we should probably assume
that the observable universe is, in fact, real. But you do note above
that you care about knowledge. If that is true, you should detest
Descartes' point of view on the matter, because he's willing to say "I
don't know - and look - it doesn't matter!" If your true goal is
knowledge, Descartes, at least in this case, is your enemy.

> Our own senses and the observable effects that our brains control tells me
> that when I drop that meteorite on my foot it's gonna hurt. And it would in
> fact cause measurable physical damage. Which is an effect we perceive. We do
> in fact think, Therefore our own thoughts are our proof that we exist.

No. You're misinterpreting Descartes, if you did state his argument
clearly - from what you said, his point would suggest not that the
foot or the meteorite were actually real, but rather that the effect
of one upon the other would relegate the argument either way as
irrelevant - especially to whomever the foot belongs.
Descartes' point pretty much says that there's no reason to question
existence, because...well, you can stand there asking yourself if the
mangled foot is real, or you can just assume it is and go to the
hospital. A logical point of view, but not one than answers the
question of existence.

> If you perceive something to be real, it is... Even if only in your own
> mind.

Right. Even if only in your own mind. I think we've all been lied to
at one point or another by another person after all, never mind by the
misconceptions of the entire human race...

> Does this mean we're all having one mass hallucination? ;)

Well, exactly...

Best,
Jason

> Regards,
> Eric
>
>
>
>
> Rob Matson wrote:
>>>
>>> ... there is no way for you to prove that I exist or you exist,
>>> or anything that you experience is real.
>>>
>>
>> You might want to try a modern, meteoritical spin on the rhetorical
>> approach taken by Samuel Johnson in the 18th century, when he responded
>> to Bishop Berkeley's claim that matter doesn't exist, but only ~seems~
>> to. Just drop a 10-kilo Campo on your foot from a height of one meter
>> and proudly announce, "I refute it thus!" (and then have someone take
>> you to the hospital) ?;-) ?--Rob
>>
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Tue 25 Aug 2009 11:01:23 AM PDT