I Believe God Exists

[Casparov]

This is demonstrably false.   You've made an error here.

Demonstrably false means it has been demonstrated. Demonstrate away. Or point to the demonstration.

I honestly was not aware that you guys thought minds were material objects. This is interesting to me, but consistent with Materialism, so at least you are staying consistent.

[Casparov]

I wasn't talking about accepting materialism.  You think that solipsism is a good view to adopt.  I'm just encouraging you to explore and experiment with that idea.  Have you tried flying to work today, like Superman?

Materialism being false does not mean that suddenly the laws of physics no longer apply. "Either materialism or true, or we can fly." Is a False Dichotomy.

[Casparov]

OK, I  think therefore I am

Cool. We agree on the starting point.

Major unproven assumption on your part.

You seem to be saying that "mind" is equal to "objective material object" but this makes no sense whatsoever. Perhaps the use of the word "mind" is throwing people. When I say "Mind exists" what I really am saying is "Awareness exists." I know this because I am aware and cannot doubt that fact. Awareness itself is not a physical object one can touch feel hear see smell or taste. It cannot be weighed or measured or even detected in any way. It has all of the qualities of being immaterial and none of the qualities of being a material object.

I don't think so. Energy also exists and can be converted into matter and I'm pretty sure all your opponents here agree.

If you are claiming that "energy" is immaterial and coexists with "matter", then you are a dualist not a Materialist. If you are saying that "energy" is not material, then you are not a Materialist, because you are admitting the existence of something immaterial. So what does it matter if e= mc^2 if there are just two different states of Material? This changes nothing.

Observations are not claims. If you doubt what everyone including yourself observes.. then you carry the burden of proof. I can't stress this enough and you keep avoiding it. YOU have the burden of proof regardless of how much you try to dodge it. 
Is there anyone left who doubts E=mc2?

I do not doubt that we have perceptions. I doubt that we perceive the world directly and can conclusively prove that we are perceiving an objective material reality. I doubt this based on The Veil of Perception Problem, the fact that what we perceive is only a representation of an external reality. Our perceptions are produced by interpreting information which could easily be produced by Nick Bostrom's Simulated Universe.

I have no reason to assume Materialism is true. You have provided no valid reason beyond "Naive Realism" which I reject based on current scientific experimentation.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1206.6578

No naive realistic picture is compatible with our results because whether a quantum could be seen as showing particle- or wave-like behavior would depend on a causally disconnected choice. It is therefore suggestive to abandon such pictures altogether.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.2529

Most working scientists hold fast to the concept of 'realism' - a viewpoint according to which an external reality exists independent of observation....Our result suggests that giving up the concept of locality is not sufficient to be consistent with quantum experiments, unless certain intuitive features of realism are abandoned.

I have absolutely no reason to accept your world view. The only logical conclusion I can come to that is consistent with what I can justify as existing philosophically and that is consistent with current scientific experimentation is that Materialism is False, Substance Dualism is False, and Idealism entails.

[sasuke]

Materialism being false does not mean that suddenly the laws of physics no longer apply. That is a false dichotomy. "Either materialism or true, or we can fly."

You're the one who thinks that solipsism is a good starting point.  I'm not telling you to adopt materialism at all.  As a matter of fact, I want you to accept that we could never truly know anything and put that to the test.  Dive deeply into that solipsistic bullshit of yours and ignore that I ever said anything to you, after all, I could be just a figment of your imagination.  You should entertain all possibilities as equally likely.  I am not talking about materialism at all.  You keep pretending otherwise doesn't make it so, but then again, you never really know.

[Casparov]

Fine, we all agree you can start with I think therefore I am.

Cool. Im happy to hear that.

Absolutely wrong! While it is valid to doubt existence, to conclude non existence is illogical at this point.

Immaterial is only equal to non-existence if you are a Materialist. Experience is real. Experience obviously exists. But experience itself, on it's own, is not Material. Experience is immaterial.

I will point out that  while you may say this, you behave differently from your stated belief. You have been asked several times to jump out of a building to show faith in your claim that the world is not real. You don't because it's not logical to gamble your very existence on an unprovable philosophical position. So you take the only logical step available. You don't jump.

If I were a brain in a vat experiencing a simulated universe, I definitely wouldn't jump of any buildings to "show faith" in this.  Pain is still a very real experience, even to a brain in a vat. To say that if "If materialism is false, then jumping out of a building wont hurt" is a false dichotomy you are setting up. If the simulation is a consistent one with rigid rules such as our laws of physics, jumping out of the building will result in my death within the simulation, meaning my existence within the simulated universe is no longer consistent with it's rule set. So I don't get to play anymore.

Jumping out of a building has the exact same result whether I am living in an objective material universe or I am living in Nick Bostrom's Simulated Universe, therefore the fact that I do jump out of building to prove my point is no proof that I actually am a Materialist in disguise.

The only way you or anyone else can (and does) proceed logically from "I think therefore I am" is "I feel therefore I'm real"
Even if it's an assumption it is the only logical assumption you can make.

THANK YOU BABY JESUS!!! ding ding ding ding ding!! :new_birthday:

You are the first to finally admit that it is an assumption! Thank you very much for your intellectual honesty, it is truly commendable considering the circumstances!

"i feel therefore it's real" yes, the experience is absolutely real. This catchy phrase however does not justify materialism in any way.

The problem is of course that it is not the only logical assumption you can make. If I have not yet made that clear I don't know what to tell you. Clearly there are other options. Maybe you prefer this assumption over the other assumptions, but the cold hard fact is, an assumption is an assumption.

Here is an example:
You awake at the edge of cliff with no knowledge of how you got there. You know you exist because you can think. You know nothing else for sure. What is your next logical step? If you said to assume nothing is real (solipsism) and jump off the cliff you are wrong, yet this is the argument you are making.

I don't assume that nothing is real. I know that I am real. I know that experience is real. I know that information is real. (all of which are immaterial) Therefore, I do not jump off the cliff. The experience will be real regardless.

If you awake at the edge of the cliff with another person (who may be an illusion) and you want to convince that person to jump over the cliff with you... You have the burden of proof to convince that other person that everything you are both feeling and observing is an illusion.

Let's say me and this person are existing in "the matrix" and we both know it. We know that to assume that we exist in a Material Objective Universe would be incorrect. We both know that we are actually experiencing an "illusion" created by the information being sent to our consciousnesses through the matrix, and guess what....

I STILL COULD NOT CONVINCE HIM TO JUMP!!

And I wouldn't try, because I wouldn't jump either! This false dichotomy you guys are setting up is ridiculous. If Materialism is false, that does not automatically mean that we exist in wacky crazy fun wonderland where we can just jump off of cliffs and buildings and the laws and rules of reality that we have always experienced suddenly seise to do what they do.

When a character jumps off a cliff in Skyrim, it dies. Is this proof that skyrim is an objective material universe?

[Casparov]

BTW, the Cartesian "I think therefore I am" is no proof of existence simply because if you are a simulation (an illusion), saying the "I think therefore I am" by a fictional character is still a fictional statement.

BAZINGA

Very strange logic, a demonstration that you are not following the conversation very well.

If I am existing in a simulation, that means everything I see hear taste smell and touch is virtual. But I still know that "I" am experiencing all of these sensations. I cannot doubt that.

If I am in a dream, that means that everything I see hear taste smell and touch are mental constructs. But I still know that "I am having the experience" I cannot doubt this. The act of doubting is itself a demonstration that exist.

No matter what i am aware of, whether it is an illusion or not. If I am aware at all, I know that I exist, and am unable to doubt that fact.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

[Mr.Obvious]

                                                                                                                                                    Wait a minute. You guys aren't real because you are part of my dream. You are telling me that  I'm also part of someone's dream? This is getting confusing. 

We need to go deeper!

[Mr.Obvious]

Demonstrably false means it has been demonstrated. Demonstrate away. Or point to the demonstration.

I honestly was not aware that you guys thought minds were material objects. This is interesting to me, but consistent with Materialism, so at least you are staying consistent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQLypwgqefc

[josephpalazzo]

I shall consider the alternative:

Mind Brain, in which all mind activities occurred, is material. It therefore exists independent of mind. It has a weight and a mass that is measurable.

FIFY

[josephpalazzo]

Very strange logic, a demonstration that you are not following the conversation very well.

If I am existing in a simulation, that means everything I see hear taste smell and touch is virtual.

You have no way of knowing it is virtual. So how can you make that assertion???

But I still know that "I" am experiencing all of these sensations. I cannot doubt that.

You can have Superman says in a DC comic book: "I think therefore I am". That doesn't mean Superman really exist.

If I am in a dream, that means that everything I see hear taste smell and touch are mental constructs. But I still know that "I am having the experience" I cannot doubt this. The act of doubting is itself a demonstration that exist.

No you don't. It's only once you step out of your dream state that you can make that assertion: that you know the difference between being in a wake state or in a dream state.

No matter what i am aware of, whether it is an illusion or not. If I am aware at all, I know that I exist, and am unable to doubt that fact.

But you still won't know if your existence is an illusion or not. You might believe that you exist, but you can't prove it.

[La Dolce Vita]

Ok, just one final attempt to knock some sense into you, in case you are genuinly not pulling our leg:

You see the world around you, correct? You can feel it, touch it, smell it. Every other person (save people with various handicaps) can do the same. I'm not making the claim that you are not dreaming, and that we aren't all figments of your imagination (though I do think(therefor I am), so from my point of view, if you are right, you don't exist) - but, which is more likely? You experience a reality - and you claim that everything we feel and see is a lie. Well, then you need to demonstrate it, because clearly, the acceptance of absolutely everything we can verify around us with every tool we know appears to be the only logical default position.

I'm certainly not 100.00000% sure this is right, but nothing implies otherwise (and if we were part of a simulation that wouldn't change a thing, it would be no different from our universe existing within a different reality outside it. It would only give us more information).

But your position is pro-god, so let's shut up about what's provable, and what's fucking logical.

On the one hand we have never observed any minds directly controlling this reality. We have never observed minds working without a body. And everything we observe appear to be material.

Your god however has never been observed and nothing has ever implied it's existence.


Also, if you genuinely are a solipsist: WHY ARE YOU ARGUING WITH FICTIONAL PEOPLE? WHY ARE YOU INTERACTING WITH US? Seriously, what the fuck is the point?

[Jason78]

Demonstrably false means it has been demonstrated. Demonstrate away. Or point to the demonstration.

I honestly was not aware that you guys thought minds were material objects. This is interesting to me, but consistent with Materialism, so at least you are staying consistent.

Head injuries that cause the sufferer to act differently and think differently are well documented.   As are the effects of hormones and chemicals on the thinking process.   If your mind were immaterial, then it wouldn't be affected if I were to inject you with one ampoule of adrenaline.

[Mister Agenda]

Sooo....

I believe God exists. And I'm willing to debate with people who don't agree with me. And so here I am. Hi.

Hi. I agree that you believe God exists.

[stromboli]

If the mind doesn't rely on the brain then why do we lose certain faculties when we damage parts of our brain? Why do we even need a brain? Why don't we have a disembodied mind which floats around our physical body?

To say that everything beyond your personal experience is ultimately not provable may be true in the philosophical sense, but you have to admit that the universal commonality of aspects of existence render them as real. The fact that we from different countries can communicate with shared experience is evidence that information is real. Mind has to process information. Mind receives information from my mind. Therefore mind and information by common understanding have to be understood experientially as real.

You have completely sidestepped the aspect of testing. You also separate science from materialism, as two separate things. Materialism is a philosophy; science is not a philosophy but a method quantifying what we experience. If we universally agree in the periodic table, then for all intents and purposes we can agree it is real. If we can agree gravity is real, the physical, measurable aspects of the universe by that same logic can be assumed as real. If we don't have the common understanding that something is real, then we could not communicate or interact in any way.

Solipsism is self refuting . If the brain doing the experiencing exists then reality exists in some form . Given that the
most parsimonious explanation is that the reality we experience ( with due reference to the limitations of the senses )
is the real reality because if one brain exists then a barrier to other brains existing is required and this constitutes an unnecessary multiplication of entities . Occam's Razor does the rest

Regardless of your argument, there is still a universal understanding of what we observe experientially. There is a vast body of agreed upon information that for all intents and purposes we have to agree upon as real in some form; were it not, there would be no commonality of understanding, no periodic table, no written language, no formal body of inquiry and so on.