"Objective" Evidence

[untermensche]

I sound like a person who has nothing but subjective experience and what I subjectively make of those experiences.

That is the starting point.

What science has said is it does not care if there are objects behind experience. If we can predict future experiences that is enough.

Nobody has ever shown there are objects behind experience because all they have access to are experiences, not alleged objects behind them.

 

[skepticalbip]

What or who do you imagine you are arguing with? Since your mind is all there is then you could save yourself a lot of frustration by imagining that you turn off your imaginary computer and internally arguing with yourself.

- - - this has been a message from your own mind trying to save yourself frustration.

 

[untermensche]

As an active mind I imagine there are other active minds out there.

I do not believe I am the only active mind.

That is my faith.

 

[skepticalbip]

As an active mind I imagine there are other active minds out there.

Exactly. You are only imagining.

I do not believe I am the only active mind.

But you can not know that.

That is my faith.

So it is a religion that can't be questioned then?

 

[steve_bank]

My infinite loop detector is sounding. Hard to communicate with somebody with a limited vocabulary.

I've gotten all I can out of this.

 

[untermensche]

Exactly. You are only imagining.

But you can not know that.

That is my faith.

So it is a religion that can't be questioned then?

Do you have faith that there are objects behind your experiences?

Or do you claim to be able to peak behind experiences?

- - - Updated - - -

My infinite loop detector is sounding. Hard to communicate with somebody with a limited vocabulary.

I've gotten all I can out of this.

This is above and beyond you.

It takes knowing the difference between an experience and alleged objects behind experience.

 

[skepticalbip]

Do you have faith that there are objects behind your experiences?

Or do you claim to be able to peak behind experiences?

Such silly self reflections. As your mind, I know that I am all there is.

 

[untermensche]

Do you have faith that there are objects behind your experiences?

Or do you claim to be able to peak behind experiences?

Such silly self reflections. As your mind, I know that I am all there is.

You can't know that. But you can know that as a mind all you have access to are experiences.

That is what a human is. An organism that experiences and is able to subjectively make something of those experiences.

 

[skepticalbip]

My infinite loop detector is sounding. Hard to communicate with somebody with a limited vocabulary.

I've gotten all I can out of this.

It's a shame that what could have been an interesting thread has been hijacked by the master thread destroyer that has hijacked so many other potentially interesting threads.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

You have no argument.

Says you.

“Says you”? What are you, five?

My argument begins with the clear fact that all a human has access to are subjective experiences and the things they subjectively make of those subjective experiences.

That’s not an argument.

 

[Subsymbolic]

My infinite loop detector is sounding. Hard to communicate with somebody with a limited vocabulary.

I've gotten all I can out of this.

Infuriating isn't it.

 

[Subsymbolic]

Do you have faith that there are objects behind your experiences?

Or do you claim to be able to peak behind experiences?

Such silly self reflections. As your mind, I know that I am all there is.

You can't know that. But you can know that as a mind all you have access to are experiences.

That is what a human is. An organism that experiences and is able to subjectively make something of those experiences.

Fuck it.

Right, let's do this.

Just like your ham fisted assertion that everyone else's evidence wasn't objective while helping yourself to subjective premises as if they were objective, your tedious assertion of a sceptical position is incoherent.

Here's why.

It's your claim: all you have access to are experiences

Well, right from the off you are wrong. You've helped yourself to a plural you can not logically support.

Here's literally all you can say:

There is an experience.


Because what you can't help yourself to is memory. YOu can only have one experience at a time and, as you can no more trust memory, in the absence of any supporting theory, than you can anything else. So all you have is the experience you are experiencing at that moment at the moment you are experiencing it. That is literally the only thing that your Cartesian universal acid guarantees. It doesn't even guarantee that you are experiencing the experience. just that there is an experience now. It can't be a compound of several experiences over time because memory. Again. Thus, you cannot have the experience of you experiencing. Just the experience. No you, no I, no self, nothing. Just the brute fact of experience now.

So if global scepticism really were a live position, that is what it would be. No language, no self, no continuity, just an endless singular context free experience.

And that, my little trollzombie, is a barren creed to cleave to. Most undergraduates get over it by the second Descartes to Kant seminar.

Oh and while you are being sceptical, good luck with explaining where the language to express your doubt came from. Seriously, sustaining global scepticism is the most credulous thing anyone can do.

 

[skepticalbip]

You can't know that. But you can know that as a mind all you have access to are experiences.

That is what a human is. An organism that experiences and is able to subjectively make something of those experiences.

Fuck it.

....................

Fair warning: Past experience has convinced me that reason is futile and just a waste of time. It only sucks you into the infinite loop of responding to infantile unsupported (and unreasoned) assertions that are repeated endlessly even though they were repetedly shown to be unreasoned.

 

[untermensche]

“Says you”? What are you, five?

You get what you deserve.

You who thinks the heat and the heater are the same thing.

I would be ashamed to be so lost in public.

My argument begins with the clear fact that all a human has access to are subjective experiences and the things they subjectively make of those subjective experiences.

That’s not an argument.

It is the foundation of many arguments.

It has many implications.

But it is being disputed with nothing but indignation.

To show it is wrong you have to demonstrate how you have access to more than your experiences.

Go ahead. Try to make up for your heater/heat embarrassment.

- - - Updated - - -

You can't know that. But you can know that as a mind all you have access to are experiences.

That is what a human is. An organism that experiences and is able to subjectively make something of those experiences.

Fuck it.

....................

Fair warning: Past experience has convinced me that reason is futile and just a waste of time. It only sucks you into the infinite loop of responding to infantile unsupported (and unreasoned) assertions that are repeated endlessly even though they were repetedly shown to be unreasoned.

My assertion that all you have access to are your experiences is absolute truth.

What else do you have?

 

[untermensche]

Here's literally all you can say:

There is an experience.

What knows it is experiencing red when it is experiencing red?

 

[Subsymbolic]

Here's literally all you can say:

There is an experience.

What knows it is experiencing red when it is experiencing red?

You violate your own sceptical premise. There is an experience of red. That’s it. If you disallow it being instantiated, you also disallow all the other scaffolding you clearly want to hold on to. The heart of philosophy is consistency. I know you don’t understand but that’s not my problem. This is just a waste of everyone’s time.

 

[untermensche]

Here's literally all you can say:

There is an experience.

What knows it is experiencing red when it is experiencing red?

You violate your own sceptical premise. There is an experience of red. That’s it. If you disallow it being instantiated, you also disallow all the other scaffolding you clearly want to hold on to. The heart of philosophy is consistency. I know you don’t understand but that’s not my problem. This is just a waste of everyone’s time.

The experience of red is what the thing that can experience has.

And it can have more than the experience of red.

 

[steve_bank]

My infinite loop detector is sounding. Hard to communicate with somebody with a limited vocabulary.

I've gotten all I can out of this.

Infuriating isn't it.

Not at all.

It was a good sparring session, I gained from it and now it is diminishing returns.

Getting annoyed with someone on an anonymous forum makes no sense.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

You get what you deserve.

If only that were true.

You who thinks the heat and the heater are the same thing.

Wrong again.

I would be ashamed to be so lost in public.

Demonstrably untrue. Literally everything you have posted—and continue to post—proves again and again and again how deeply lose you are. You are so lost, in fact, that you can’t see that everyone has been helping you to try to see that you have not come up with anything new or even robust and all of the many many many flaws in your position.

You don’t understand what you are talking about. You have grasped one tiny thread and lost the quilt.

That’s not an argument.

It is the foundation of many arguments.

But is not itself an argument.

It has many implications.

That have all been dealt with thousands of times over by far more intelligent people than you or I for longer than you or I have been alive. What you continue to not comprehend is that you have not discovered anything new, nor do you understand the extent of what you have or the “many implications” it generates. You can’t see your own ignorance and keep thinking that it’s a matter of insistence or demand or declaration.

But it is being disputed with nothing but indignation.

So wrong. So fundamentally immaturely wrong.

To show it is wrong

It isn’t wrong, YOU don’t understand what you are talking about or its full extent and implications. You are a freshman thinking he’s a senior.

Go ahead. Try to make up for your heater/heat embarrassment.

The heater generates the heat. “Heat” is not a separate thing IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HEATER GENERATING THE HEAT you stupid stupid fuck.

 

[steve_bank]

In the deep spiritual state of Omzigwa accesible only after years of training it can be reeaized that heater and heat are one and inseprable. Without a heater there is no heat. Wiithout heat the heater does not exist. At the highest level pf Omzigwa it is realized that heat and heater are both subjective apparitions with no reality.