Xain, if you don’t exist, who’s been typing all of your posts?
Where else can you be except where you are?
It doesn’t really matter what anyone says does it Xian? If someone says there is a way to work toward happiness, you say there is no self to work toward anything. If someone says there is no self so you can choose what you want to be, you say you can’t choose to be something that doesn’t exist. If someone points out that you do exist as far as we can tell, you say you’re not so sure. Sometimes it seems you want to be “true”, but I’m not sure what you want to be true to. So, knowing that you will just reject it, I offer this bit of theological comedy.
At around 8 minutes, she gets to the stuff about the “true self”, the “ideal self”. She’s agreeing with what you say about how the world we are shown is one of lies. She says, no one’s ever become their ideal self. She uses the language of the Bible, the language of Satan, which is sometimes translated the “accuser”. The accuser judges you, it’s that voice that you are not your true self. The accuser lies, it says you have to apologize and says who your competition is and says what you should value. Her response is, tell it to shut up, nothing gets to tell you who you are.
Your perception of yourself, and your telling yourself the story of who you are (or aren’t), is happening inside your skin.
You know Tim, I’m starting to wonder if the name is not the clue. His most persistent sticking point sounds like something right out of the fundamentalist playbook. Today it’s “If there is no permanent self to serve as a guide then you aren’t really being guided.” There was another one recently. He hasn’t said it, but he seems to be pointing in the direction of Presuppositionalism.
Idk about that. If he is a closeted christian, he’s a pretty sneaky one. I’ve been thinking that he has a disorder that has stumped his development of empathic abilities, and perhaps the same disorder is active in his inability to consider anything beyond his current mindset. But, of course, I don’t really know that for sure, either.
The thing about meaning is that it just doesn’t exist. I struggle to meaning things meaningful that in reality doesn’t exist.
As far as the “you”that you guys mean, I am afraid that there just isn’t evidence for me to believe it exists. As some others have shown:
As for self - this problem is not about human beings as bodies or whole people - they obviously exist if anything does. It is about the idea of a 'me' who seems to sit inside this head, looking out through the eyes, and having control over this body. From some mystical and meditation traditions we learn that this is false - self is illusory - and neuroscience is now coming to the same conclusion. There is no room inside the brain for anything of this kind, and nothing for it to do if there were. So somehow we have to reconsider what we mean when we feel sure there IS someone in here.That was from Susan Blackmore who I asked about this issue.
I struggle to meaning things meaningfulI've cut you a lot of slack on grammar and misplaced words, but it would be helpful if you watched that a little closer.
That was from Susan Blackmore who I asked about this issue.So, did you go out to lunch with her or what? Just curious. She's pretty smart and I like that she spent some years as a ghost hunter, it shows that she really tested these ideas that she now says are wrong. As for her above statements on "self", I agree completely and have never stated otherwise for this 18 pages of pointless conservation. What you don't address, rather you avoid, is the first sentence,
As for self – this problem is not about human beings as bodies or whole people – they obviously exist if anything does. -- Susan BlackmoreObviously, your body exists, to the extent we are able to comprehend existence. It has a nervous system that can move it around. It has physical sensations we call feelings. It has brain activity that we call thoughts that we call "you". There's a big difference between the "self" that Susan is talking about, and "you", that we're talking about. So a question like, "What do YOU do now that you are aware that the SELF doesn't exist?" is a perfectly well formed and legitimate question.
I will try to say it again. The “you” that you perceive, whether you call it illusory or not, is behavior, a special kind of behavior, verbal behavior and perceptual behavior. All of it exists inside your skin. "You"are the speaker of, and the listener to, your thoughts.
So reconsider that.
It doesn’t matter whether that is enough to satisfy you. That is what “you” is.
"I think, therefore I am." DescartesThere's a lot of meat on those few words.
How is that simple quote not enough to convince anyone that they exist? The fact the question of existence can be asked is proof of existence. And if someone’s honestly worried about being a brain in a vat, they should know that they still exist and every experience is 100% valid.
There’s no shame in any form of existence, since existence is binary (something either does or doesn’t). And if there’s zero difference between experiencing reality in a physical way or purely mentally, what’s the big deal?
Truly. And the possibly outrageous sounding claim I made was preceded by Rene’s (Descartes’) going on 400 yrs ago, now.
I think it was in Simon Blackburn’s “Think”, where he spoke of an island that DesCartes leaves us on. Sure, we think, therefore we have a way to verify our own existence, but what of morality and creation? DesCartes solves these problems with the necessary first cause argument, a first cause that is perfectly good. My language might be a little off of his, but basically God. It’s not a very good solution to the problem, and one that Xian has recreated for himself by not doing his homework. Again from Blackburn; Hume begins to solve the problem by raising skepticism in its purest forms. Question everything and you’ll begin to build knowledge of what’s real. He points out that you can’t live your regular daily life if you constantly question everything though and he never quite solves that dilemma either.
Over a couple hundred years, we built our way out of it by accepting some assertions, and always admitting they are assertions, valuing demonstrations of truth, and keeping in mind that all knowledge is provisional.
Lausten: "Question everything and you’ll begin to build knowledge of what’s real."Some people ask questions and assume that if they don't get definitive answers, they can't do anything until you get a definitive answer. Their lives are frozen without answers to supposedly fundamental questions, so they continue to ask and ask and ask, not realizing there aren't concrete answers to be had (and even if there were answers, they only have an impact on how to live life if one allows it.)
Anyone who can’t handle ambiguity, especially on questions about self and existence, is in big trouble.
It’s troublesome since most of our lives are built on this “who you truly are”, like some compass to guide you on career, love, interests, etc.
I think therefor I am has long been thrown out as legitimate proof of a self since it only proves thought is happening. It doesn’t prove a self.
Her description of a self doesn’t help much since it’s exactly what I worry of. It means I’m just a body, empty. There’s nothing to guide or really live my life by.
Her description of a self doesn’t help much since it’s exactly what I worry of.By "her", are you referring to Susan Blackmore?
Wtf do u want the self to be? Some little supernatural man that surreptitiously lives inside of you? If u had that u would likely be complaining about who the hell that little man is.
At best “you” is just your brain and body communicating with itself by virtue of activated neuronal patterns. No supernatural entity. If u can’t wrap ur self around that and deal with it, if u can’t enjoy ur self for what u are, too frickin’ bad for u. Other ppl just ignore the topic altogether. Those who recognize reality, come to accept it, or otherwise deal with it.
@Tim
Have been following this weird discussion for some time. I think you’ve got it covered.
My take; Xian seems to engaged in some self indulgent adolescent navel gazing. Apologies if I’m being harsh. I really do not have your patience, which in this case seems saint-like to this cranky reprobate.
I do imagine Xian as a mid-teen boy, but who knows. Not harsh at all. I occasionally do something called “restorative justice”, which is talking to teens who committed some minor crime and trying to get them to understand their impact on the community. I don’t have a lot of contact with people like that normally, so arguing with Xian is good practice.
I don’t envy you.
Worked in Federal welfare for 25 years. During part of that time I had to deal with homeless youth. Here we have a Federal welfare payment called "Young Homeless Allowance’. The criteria are very strict… As a rule of thumb, I could expect that the kid had probably been the victim of some kind of gross abuse. They tended to present as sullen, angry, and distrustful of adults. Getting factual information was like drawing teeth. Mercifully, we had social workers who would try to talk to them about the inner person. I lacked the patience.
I do imagine Xian as a mid-teen boy, but who knows. Not harsh at all. I occasionally do something called “restorative justice”, which is talking to teens who committed some minor crime and trying to get them to understand their impact on the community. I don’t have a lot of contact with people like that normally, so arguing with Xian is good practice.What you call justice just sounds like “I can’t answer it”.
Getting back to the original point about being the universe is based on the idea that there is no duality. That there is no you or me. That you begin and end at the body and that time and space are an illusion. That reality has no beginning or end, that nothing changes, and that such things are just living in the illusion. That what you see is an illusion (or rather what appears is an illusion) or Maya.