You've fallen into the "confirmation bias" trap. You are asking a question but you already expect the answer to be "yes".Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 11:11 am Ignoring the philosophers ask them if the external world exists and I'm betting all would answer "yes".
Epistemology is about disconfirmation, not confirmation. Disconfirmation results in new information.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKA4w2O61Xo
But more than that the question (and answer) is incomplete, because if we are going to sub-divide the world into "internal" and "external" categories then we also need to ask the question "Does the internal world exist?". I too am betting that the answer would be "yes".
So this begs the question: If the internal and external worlds exist - what are their respective essences and essential differences?
And I am betting you can't answer this question because you don't actually have "internal" and "external" conceptions/representations of reality, even though you claim the "external worlds exists" (whatever that means).
At best - our collective perception is our non-transcendental reality.
Even ascribing "dependency" to the world is already a model!Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 11:11 am Whilst I take your points you appear to think this world depends upon our models?
Dependencies are human constructs.