No, George or Fred could be part of the simulation telling lies.
We are living in simulating reality
Re: We are living in simulating reality
-
- Posts: 12617
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am
Re: We are living in simulating reality
Of course, their timing different.bahman wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 5:01 pmNo, the second line of argument does not follow.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 2:14 amIt just does not follow.
From your original intention, it is a problem of equivocation, i.e.
There is motion [empirical], then there is mind [pure reason].
if you correct it then it would be,
There is motion [empirical], then there is mind [empirical].
if the above is the argument, then bring the empirical evidence to justify such 'empirical based mind' exist.
Look, you don't want to say that the time of the big bang and the appearance of humans is the same!?Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 2:14 amHere is one way out for you on this;How would you start an argument like that?
There is motion [empirical], then there is a human-like mind [empirical].
The above is an empirical possibility, because we have evidence of existing human minds [empirical].
You can speculate there is a human-like-Mind [or minds] in a location 100 light years away in the universe generating reality for humans on Earth [like the Matrix].
Then you can confirm the above is real by bringing the empirical evidences to justify it is real.
The above is an empirical possibility because all the [bolded] relevant variables are empirically-based.
So the question is to bring the empirical evidence for verification, justification and testing.
It is an empirical possibility for the above empirical speculation to be real, but the possibility [based on current knowledge] is very low i.e. 0.00000001% possible.
So your original intention, i.e.
There is motion [empirical], then there is mind [pure reason].
it is a problem of equivocation, thus a non-starter.
also consider the alternative explanation,
That theists and you jumping to hasty conclusion is driven by a psychological impulse arising from an existential crisis - it is psychological soothing to jump to conclusion. You need to reflect on this alternative view.
In addition the topic of 'time' is very contentious and I believe 'time' is entangled with the human conditions and not some thing that is absolutely independent by itself.
But the point remain,
whatever 'mind' you conclude it is must be empirically possible subject to available empirical evidences for verification, testing and justification.
You should ask yourself, what is the purpose of your claim where you do not support it with empirical possibility but merely insist upon it based on reasoning only. As I had stated this empty pursuit is driven by an unmodulated inherent psychological impulse in all humans.
IF your claim has no empirical possibility, it is mere rhetoric that will lead to a slippery slope by others culminating with the possible extermination of the human species, e.g. the mind of the Islamic God.
-
- Posts: 12617
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am
Re: We are living in simulating reality
NO?
Hey! you have a lot of knowledge you need updating.
All humans see the same thing is common visual illusions, e.g. bent-stick-water, a mirage in the desert, etc. but they are not real.
Are the bent vertical line below real?
Note;
Mass hallucination is a phenomenon in which a large group of people, usually in physical proximity to each other, all experience the same hallucination simultaneously. Mass hallucination is a common explanation for mass UFO sightings, appearances of the Virgin Mary, and other paranormal phenomena.
https://psychology.fandom.com/wiki/Mass_hallucination[/b]
There are cases where a whole class of students went hysteric & berserk and it was reported they all saw some similar evil apparitions.In most cases, mass hallucination refers to a combination of suggestion and pareidolia, wherein one person will see, or pretend to see, something unusual (like the face of Jesus in the burn-marks on a tortilla, or the face of a kidnapped girl on a blank billboard) and point it out to other people. Having been told what to look for, those other people will consciously or unconsciously convince themselves to recognize the apparition, and will in turn point it out to others.
-ibid
Re: We are living in simulating reality
What if instead if conceding to you that for any change to happen in an object a mind causes it, I say for any change in an object to be perceived, a mind must first perceive that object and any changes which the object goes through.bahman wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:51 pmYes, everything is minds and qualia. Minds being primary and qualia are due to minds.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:27 pmWhat's the problem with not thinking everything is qualia and mind?
It is a matter of fact. If there is a motion that is not due to my mind then it is due to another mind. There are motions that they are not due to me so there is at least one mind more.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:12 pm You're making claims about all of reality when you are only in touch with yourself, by our own admission. You don't know if the same ontology holds everywhere.
You want to say that a mind must CAUSE the change. I agree that for change to be observed, a mind must be present. But I don’t believe the mind caused that change. For change to be perceived, we have several interdependent criteria:
We need,
1. A mind independent object (otherwise it’s just a hallucination, that only you see).
2. The mind independent object needs to have some EXTERNAL FORCE applied to it, I.e. Newton’s law.
3. The mind must have the ability to perceive that object, in this case, visually. The mind therefore needs eyes, and a functioning brain which interprets those sensory signals.
4. The object needs to be illuminated by an external light source, for the eyes to detect the light from the object, I.e. the medium in which the eyes detect the object.
Without all of these criteria, a change in an object cannot be perceived.
Now, we could ask, how does the perceptual system detect changes in that object, and represent them to the consciousness. This is where the mind becomes a key player, in the construction of the perception of change.
Re: We are living in simulating reality
nope, denial off the truth doesn't prove simulation, just proves your a liarbahman wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 5:03 pmNo, George or Fred could be part of the simulation telling lies.
Re: We are living in simulating reality
saying something looks like something doesn't mean they know or believe or even suggest that what they see is a real thing. that's like saying a cloud looks like a bird means the person believes its a bird.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 4:07 amNO?
Hey! you have a lot of knowledge you need updating.
All humans see the same thing is common visual illusions, e.g. bent-stick-water, a mirage in the desert, etc. but they are not real.
Are the bent vertical line below real?
Note;
Mass hallucination is a phenomenon in which a large group of people, usually in physical proximity to each other, all experience the same hallucination simultaneously. Mass hallucination is a common explanation for mass UFO sightings, appearances of the Virgin Mary, and other paranormal phenomena.
https://psychology.fandom.com/wiki/Mass_hallucination[/b]
There are cases where a whole class of students went hysteric & berserk and it was reported they all saw some similar evil apparitions.In most cases, mass hallucination refers to a combination of suggestion and pareidolia, wherein one person will see, or pretend to see, something unusual (like the face of Jesus in the burn-marks on a tortilla, or the face of a kidnapped girl on a blank billboard) and point it out to other people. Having been told what to look for, those other people will consciously or unconsciously convince themselves to recognize the apparition, and will in turn point it out to others.
-ibid
Re: We are living in simulating reality
Of course, time is changing so it is contingent as well.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 3:36 amOf course, their timing different.bahman wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 5:01 pmNo, the second line of argument does not follow.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 2:14 am
It just does not follow.
From your original intention, it is a problem of equivocation, i.e.
There is motion [empirical], then there is mind [pure reason].
if you correct it then it would be,
There is motion [empirical], then there is mind [empirical].
if the above is the argument, then bring the empirical evidence to justify such 'empirical based mind' exist.
Look, you don't want to say that the time of the big bang and the appearance of humans is the same!?Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 2:14 am
Here is one way out for you on this;
There is motion [empirical], then there is a human-like mind [empirical].
The above is an empirical possibility, because we have evidence of existing human minds [empirical].
You can speculate there is a human-like-Mind [or minds] in a location 100 light years away in the universe generating reality for humans on Earth [like the Matrix].
Then you can confirm the above is real by bringing the empirical evidences to justify it is real.
The above is an empirical possibility because all the [bolded] relevant variables are empirically-based.
So the question is to bring the empirical evidence for verification, justification and testing.
It is an empirical possibility for the above empirical speculation to be real, but the possibility [based on current knowledge] is very low i.e. 0.00000001% possible.
So your original intention, i.e.
There is motion [empirical], then there is mind [pure reason].
it is a problem of equivocation, thus a non-starter.
also consider the alternative explanation,
That theists and you jumping to hasty conclusion is driven by a psychological impulse arising from an existential crisis - it is psychological soothing to jump to conclusion. You need to reflect on this alternative view.
In addition the topic of 'time' is very contentious and I believe 'time' is entangled with the human conditions and not some thing that is absolutely independent by itself.
I just want to prove that mind exists since change exists.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 2:14 am But the point remain,
whatever 'mind' you conclude it is must be empirically possible subject to available empirical evidences for verification, testing and justification.
You should ask yourself, what is the purpose of your claim where you do not support it with empirical possibility but merely insist upon it based on reasoning only. As I had stated this empty pursuit is driven by an unmodulated inherent psychological impulse in all humans.
IF your claim has no empirical possibility, it is mere rhetoric that will lead to a slippery slope by others culminating with the possible extermination of the human species, e.g. the mind of the Islamic God.
Re: We are living in simulating reality
Yes, that is qualia.Dimebag wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 11:58 amWhat if instead if conceding to you that for any change to happen in an object a mind causes it, I say for any change in an object to be perceived, a mind must first perceive that object and any changes which the object goes through.bahman wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:51 pmYes, everything is minds and qualia. Minds being primary and qualia are due to minds.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:27 pm What's the problem with not thinking everything is qualia and mind?
It is a matter of fact. If there is a motion that is not due to my mind then it is due to another mind. There are motions that they are not due to me so there is at least one mind more.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:12 pm You're making claims about all of reality when you are only in touch with yourself, by our own admission. You don't know if the same ontology holds everywhere.
You want to say that a mind must CAUSE the change. I agree that for change to be observed, a mind must be present. But I don’t believe the mind caused that change. For change to be perceived, we have several interdependent criteria:
We need,
1. A mind independent object (otherwise it’s just a hallucination, that only you see).
What is an object and what is force?
Mind does not need a sensory system in order to experience and cause change. In the case of humans, mind perceives what is constructed by brain.
That is again for mind in the case of humans by which I mean the mind that perceives qualia that are caused by the brain.
Mind directly experiences qualia and causes a change in it.Dimebag wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 11:58 am Without all of these criteria, a change in an object cannot be perceived.
Now, we could ask, how does the perceptual system detect changes in that object, and represent them to the consciousness. This is where the mind becomes a key player, in the construction of the perception of change.
Re: We are living in simulating reality
What truth. The only truth that you are sure about it is that you experience.
Re: We are living in simulating reality
BUT you are IN a SIMULATION, CORRECT?bahman wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:18 pmWhat is the problem?Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:12 pmYou certain asserted it, yes. But you are assuming that your experience and ontology is universal, despite the obvious epistemological problems entailed by you being in a simulation.
Yes, all mind must be like me if they cause motion.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:12 pm Yes, you think all minds all reality must be like you. But it's just an assumption.
THEREFORE, ABSOLUTELY EVERY thing you SAY and CLAIM could be ABSOLUTELY False, Wrong, and Incorrect. This is because you could have been SIMULATED to SAY and CLAIM only 'that' which is False, Wrong, and Incorrect, correct?
Or, has your SIMULATED Creator MADE 'you' to ONLY SEE the opposite here?
Could your Creator MADE you to BELIEVE that whatever you SAY and CLAIM is ACTUALLY True, right, and correct?
Re: We are living in simulating reality
How could ANY thing cause motion when it has NO direct contact with it?bahman wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 4:17 pmAgain: It is a matter of fact. If there is a motion that is not due to my mind then it is due to another mind. There are motions that they are not due to me so there is at least one mind more. How a motion could be due to my conscious mind and I am not aware of it?Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 6:50 amYes, I knew you believed that.
I wrote:What's the problem with not thinking everything is qualia and mind?Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:12 pm You're making claims about all of reality when you are only in touch with yourself, by our own admission. You don't know if the same ontology holds everywhere.And again. I ask you how you can know things that are beyond your mind and you repeat your position. I know that is your position.It is a matter of fact. If there is a motion that is not due to my mind then it is due to another mind. There are motions that they are not due to me so there is at least one mind more.
Re: We are living in simulating reality
Not everything is false. For example, I know that I experience.Age wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 6:19 pmBUT you are IN a SIMULATION, CORRECT?bahman wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:18 pmWhat is the problem?Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:12 pm You certain asserted it, yes. But you are assuming that your experience and ontology is universal, despite the obvious epistemological problems entailed by you being in a simulation.
Yes, all mind must be like me if they cause motion.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 9:12 pm Yes, you think all minds all reality must be like you. But it's just an assumption.
THEREFORE, ABSOLUTELY EVERY thing you SAY and CLAIM could be ABSOLUTELY False, Wrong, and Incorrect. This is because you could have been SIMULATED to SAY and CLAIM only 'that' which is False, Wrong, and Incorrect, correct?
Or, has your SIMULATED Creator MADE 'you' to ONLY SEE the opposite here?
Could your Creator MADE you to BELIEVE that whatever you SAY and CLAIM is ACTUALLY True, right, and correct?
Re: We are living in simulating reality
We have been through this several times. You believe in regress which is absurd so I cannot help you with that.
Re: We are living in simulating reality
Mind has direct contact with qualia when it experience qualia.Age wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 6:41 pmHow could ANY thing cause motion when it has NO direct contact with it?bahman wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 4:17 pmAgain: It is a matter of fact. If there is a motion that is not due to my mind then it is due to another mind. There are motions that they are not due to me so there is at least one mind more. How a motion could be due to my conscious mind and I am not aware of it?Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 6:50 am Yes, I knew you believed that.
I wrote:
And again. I ask you how you can know things that are beyond your mind and you repeat your position. I know that is your position.