"Objective" Evidence

[untermensche]

I am brain. I create opinions as “presentations” which I then give to “that which can express opinions.”

Whatever you say.

Since I am brain, I cannot also be “that which can express opinions.” One thing cannot also be another thing, remember?

You don't seem to know what the word "remember" means.

Never said it. Total strawman.

Wait. So the brain has a “will” device too?

The will exists. It is not the brain. It tells the brain to move the arm.

Try it.

So, wait we now have:

1. Brain Device.
2. Brain Will Device.
3. Mind Device (aka, “that which experiences”).
4. Meta Mind Device (aka, “that which knows the Mind Device is in the act of experiencing”).
5. Meta Meta Mind Device (aka, “that which can examine what the Mind Device is experiencing”).
6. Mind Will Device.

We are a mind that experiences and a will that can act.

That is what we are.

Tell me something that is not some experience.

When will you address this? It takes a mind and a mind that can act.

- - - Updated - - -

What you know of clocks are your subjective experiences of them. Nothing more.

If you have the subjective experience of a person telling you they experience the same time as you what do you have beyond your subjective experiences?

You can call it something but it is just your subjective experiences.

You have nothing else beyond your subjective experiences and what you subjectively make of them.

I reject your objective, subjective paradigm. There is no evidence in it beyond personal testimony. I have what I choose to fill the slot you attribute to subjective. I can accept material evidences and use them as markers for objective comment.

What does this rambling mean?

Can you name one thing you have access to that is not a subjective experience?

- - - Updated - - -

Meh!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_priori_and_a_posteriori

Show me how mathematics exists beyond experience.

Where is it?

It is something humans invented using their minds and exists only if there is a mind.

 

[steve_bank]

The thought forms called Steve calling the thought forms called unternenche,,,over.

Math exists in the brain, thoughts of math are brain functions.

 

[untermensche]

The thought forms called Steve calling the thought forms called unternenche,,,over.

Math exists in the brain, thoughts of math are brain functions.

Everything exists as an experience.

You can see mathematical symbols. In other words experience them.

You can understand what the symbols are and what the rules of the game are.

You can experience that understanding.

Everything is a subjective experience and what you subjectively make of it.

There is nothing else you could produce.

You could produce something I could experience with my vision. You could produce some thought in language that I could experience.

What could you give me except an experience?

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Whatever you say.

Which is whatever you say.

You don't seem to know what the word "remember" means.

Recall, as in a previous statement or related idea.

Never said it. Total strawman.

Oh, that’s right, you—that is I—stated:

To experience means for one thing to experience some other thing.

And so why can’t the juggler experience juggling? Only “juggling” can experience juggling?

Wait. So the brain has a “will” device too?

The will exists. It is not the brain. It tells the brain to move the arm.

WOW. The will just “exists.” AND it is not brain.

Try it.

I can’t. I’m your brain, which is not your will or your mind, but only generates your mind (but nothing generates a will, except a lawyer).

So, wait we now have:

1. Brain Device.
2. Brain Will Device.
3. Mind Device (aka, “that which experiences”).
4. Meta Mind Device (aka, “that which knows the Mind Device is in the act of experiencing”).
5. Meta Meta Mind Device (aka, “that which can examine what the Mind Device is experiencing”).
6. Mind Will Device.

We are a mind that experiences and a will that can act.

And a brain that generates the mind and the “experiences”, but not the will. That just exists.

That is what we are.

“We”? Your brain and your mind?

Tell me something that is not some experience.

Brain. Brain is that which cannot experience.

When will you address this?

I have repeatedly.

It takes a mind and a mind that can act.

And a brain to generate that “mind” and “mind that can act” (three devices).

 

[untermensche]

I can’t. I’m your brain, which is not your will or your mind, but only generates your mind (but nothing generates a will, except a lawyer).

You are not my brain.

You are an experience I am having. I am a mind and I experience things, like color, which I believe is created by a brain.

You know your subjective experiences. And what you subjectively make of them.

There is nothing else you can name.

You are a mind with whatever ideas you can put forth.

Do you have any?

 

[untermensche]

It is amazing that people can live an entire life as a mind experiencing and not even know it.

 

[Elixir]

Everything exists as an experience.

Well DUH!
By what mechanism does that prevent everything from also having an objective existence?

 

[untermensche]

Everything exists as an experience.

Well DUH!
By what mechanism does that prevent everything from also having an objective existence?

It does not.

But to say there is an object behind the experience is a belief.

The knowledge is only the subjective experience.

 

[skepticalbip]

Everything exists as an experience.

Well DUH!
By what mechanism does that prevent everything from also having an objective existence?

Not really a "DUH", more a WTF.

Things don't exist as an experience. Our experience of something is how we know it exists. What is, is... and we know it is only because we experience it. However there is a hell of a lot that exists even though we don't experience it. This we know because we continually discover things that has existed long, long before anyone knew about them.

 

[untermensche]

Our experience of something is how we know it exists.

You believe it exists.

You know the experiences.

And you believe everything else.

 

[Elixir]

Everything exists as an experience.

Well DUH!
By what mechanism does that prevent everything from also having an objective existence?

It does not.

But to say there is an object behind the experience is a belief.

So "It does not" is just your belief. Funny thing how that belief seems to be shared by virtually every human and animal.

The knowledge is only the subjective experience.

So what? A lightbulb doesn't really have to work - only has to LOOK like it works.

 

[Elixir]

Everything exists as an experience.

Well DUH!
By what mechanism does that prevent everything from also having an objective existence?

Not really a "DUH", more a WTF.

Things don't exist as an experience. Our experience of something is how we know it exists. What is, is... and we know it is only because we experience it. However there is a hell of a lot that exists even though we don't experience it. This we know because we continually discover things that has existed long, long before anyone knew about them.

Well, that's correct, unless one chooses (as Unter seems to have done) to believe that prior to your own birth (or conception if you choose to believe), nothing existed. In fact, one might even decide "I don't exist! I am an illusion of my own experience that has no objective existence, but c'est la view, so I think I'll go onto an internet forum and announce to everyone that they only believe they exist! They'll be so impressed by my profundity that it will be almost as if I - and they - actually existed!"

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

I can’t. I’m your brain, which is not your will or your mind, but only generates your mind (but nothing generates a will, except a lawyer).

You are not my brain.

You can’t know that.

You are an experience I am having.

No, I am an “experience” that your brain has created for you as a “presentation” to your “mind” to “have.”

I am a mind and I experience things, like color, which I believe is created by a brain.

And that is the full extent of it and why you’ve triggered “radical skepticism” and all that it entails.

You are a mind

So you believe. Does your brain also create “belief presentations” the way it creates “experience presentations”? Oh, sorry, you can’t know that either.

with whatever ideas you can put forth.

Do you have any?

According to your beliefs, brains can’t have any ideas, only “minds” can. According to your radical skepticism, I am your brain. Which means you are simply talking to yourself. Or, rather, “you” are simply talking to your brain. Always. Full stop.

You’ve hoisted yourself with your own metaphysical petard.

 

[skepticalbip]

Not really a "DUH", more a WTF.

Things don't exist as an experience. Our experience of something is how we know it exists. What is, is... and we know it is only because we experience it. However there is a hell of a lot that exists even though we don't experience it. This we know because we continually discover things that has existed long, long before anyone knew about them.

Well, that's correct, unless one chooses (as Unter seems to have done) to believe that prior to your own birth (or conception if you choose to believe), nothing existed. In fact, one might even decide "I don't exist! I am an illusion of my own experience that has no objective existence, but c'est la view, so I think I'll go onto an internet forum and announce to everyone that they only believe they exist! They'll be so impressed by my profundity that it will be almost as if I - and they - actually existed!"

To be honest, I don't see any evidence that UM actually believes anything. His posts generally just seem to only be whatever he thinks will provoke an argument since he continually takes "positions" contrary to earlier "positions" he has expressed - sometimes even within the same thread.

 

[untermensche]

It does not.

But to say there is an object behind the experience is a belief.

So "It does not" is just your belief.

What I know are my experiences.

If I am experiencing red I know I am experiencing red.

I know I am not experiencing green.

I do not experience the table. I experience my experience of the table.

To say the table is more than the experience is belief since I do not experience the table.

So what? A lightbulb doesn't really have to work - only has to LOOK like it works.

A light bulb is constructed according to a plan.

The plan is experienced and all the materials are experienced and the activity to put it together is experienced.

It is true you need all those subjective experiences to have a light bulb.

But it doesn't make the light bulb more than a subjective experience.

If you tell me it is I am not forced by anything to believe you.

 

[untermensche]

You can’t know that.

You are the ordinary experience of a human that is lost.

That is not an experience of my brain. It can only be an experience created by a brain.

I have never had the experience of my brain.

What exactly is that?

What is the experience of your brain like? What color is your brain? What does it taste like?

You are an experience I am having.

No, I am an “experience” that your brain has created for you as a “presentation” to your “mind” to “have.”

There is no difference. An experience must be created.

You do not experience the tree. You experience a representation, a creation, of the tree.

Color is not something that exists in the world. It has to be created.

Sound in not something that exists in the world.

It is only an experience and it must be created. Vibrating air is not sound.

You are a mind

So you believe.

Yes it what the sum total of my experience tells me.

You have nothing else to work with either.

If you have experienced a zombie it is rational for you to think you are experiencing the ideas of a zombie.

According to your radical skepticism, I am your brain.

Total nonsense. Does not follow from one thing I said.

I know my experiences. That is something we can know.

While I cannot know you are some object external to my brain I cannot know you are not.

I can remain entirely uncommitted on the issue. I do not need to conclude you are just a figment of my imagination. Because I do not know that is true.

What I know is true is all I have are my subjective experiences of you and what I subjectively make out of them.

 

[steve_bank]

What I know are my experiences.

If I am experiencing red I know I am experiencing red.

I know I am not experiencing green.

I do not experience the table. I experience my experience of the table.

To say the table is more than the experience is belief since I do not experience the table.

So what? A lightbulb doesn't really have to work - only has to LOOK like it works.

A light bulb is constructed according to a plan.

The plan is experienced and all the materials are experienced and the activity to put it together is experienced.

It is true you need all those subjective experiences to have a light bulb.

But it doesn't make the light bulb more than a subjective experience.

If you tell me it is I am not forced by anything to believe you.

I can not figure out from all your posts that there is any point you are making. Stream of consciousness comes to mind, thoughts unstructured and unfiltered flowing along.

What is your position on reductionism?

 

[skepticalbip]

yadda, yadda, yadda.....

I can not figure out from all your posts that there is any point you are making. Stream of consciousness comes to mind, thoughts unstructured and unfiltered flowing along.

What is your position on reductionism?

It seems that you have noticed the same thing about UM's posts that I have. I now wonder if anyone has been able to engage in an actual discussion with him in any thread. I have tried several times but all I have gotten in return is a string of semi-thoughts and unsupported assertions that appear to be intentionally provocative.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

it’s very simple. He simply declares his position to be true. Pinocchio is a real boy by fiat.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I want to know how anyone can have a subjective experience without something objective happening to cause it.