It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
-
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2022 9:51 am
It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
Proof:
1. It is not possible to know the unknowable
2. A world outside the knowing is unknowable
3. It is not possible to know a world outside the knowing
4. Mind is knowing
5. It is not possible to know a world outside the mind
6. It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
7. The world is my mind
1. It is not possible to know the unknowable
2. A world outside the knowing is unknowable
3. It is not possible to know a world outside the knowing
4. Mind is knowing
5. It is not possible to know a world outside the mind
6. It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
7. The world is my mind
-
- Posts: 6851
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
So, you're talking to yourself?
And I'm not trying to be cute or dismissive. It's more like I'm checking in to see if you believe this or it's more of a thought experiment (and one that I didn't write, for example)
And I'm not trying to be cute or dismissive. It's more like I'm checking in to see if you believe this or it's more of a thought experiment (and one that I didn't write, for example)
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
Fine. So why are you bothering other people with tedious repetitions of your same silly mantra?
-
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2022 9:51 am
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
Do I believe it? It's a logic proof! I know it, like I know 2+2=4. It's not a thought experiment, its a proof!Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 3:48 am So, you're talking to yourself?
And I'm not trying to be cute or dismissive. It's more like I'm checking in to see if you believe this or it's more of a thought experiment (and one that I didn't write, for example)
And no, it does not follow from "The world is my mind" to "I am talking to myself". It simply means other people (and their minds) are in my mind, and obviously hidden somehow. Just like my subconscious only in a deeper way. We need to start thinking realistically about the mind and not magically like that the brain is made of non-mental physical stuff and then magically the mind appears out of it. That is very faith based and illogical.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6520
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
If writing those words doesn't fill you instantly with shame and regret, you need to visit a psychiatrist not a web forum do discuss this stuff.Magnolia5275 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 5:27 am It simply means other people (and their minds) are in my mind, and obviously hidden somehow.
-
- Posts: 6851
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
We?Magnolia5275 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 5:27 amDo I believe it? It's a logic proof! I know it, like I know 2+2=4. It's not a thought experiment, its a proof!Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 3:48 am So, you're talking to yourself?
And I'm not trying to be cute or dismissive. It's more like I'm checking in to see if you believe this or it's more of a thought experiment (and one that I didn't write, for example)
And no, it does not follow from "The world is my mind" to "I am talking to myself". It simply means other people (and their minds) are in my mind, and obviously hidden somehow. Just like my subconscious only in a deeper way. We need to start thinking realistically about the mind and not magically like that the brain is made of non-mental physical stuff and then magically the mind appears out of it. That is very faith based and illogical.
If I, for example, are in your mind, I am a part of your mind. That's you. Unless there's some boundary between us, and then you would have the same problems with knowing about things outside your mind, since for you you can only know things that you have no boundary between you and that thing.
IOW it is a solipsism.
And how could something be hidden from an all powerful mind?
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my min
I believe he means his mind interpenetrates with other minds. Imagine bubbles touching at their boundaries, and information passing between those boundaries. Thus each bubble mind can know that of other minds through this communication at their boundaries (the sense organs).Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 5:39 amWe?Magnolia5275 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 5:27 amDo I believe it? It's a logic proof! I know it, like I know 2+2=4. It's not a thought experiment, its a proof!Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 3:48 am So, you're talking to yourself?
And I'm not trying to be cute or dismissive. It's more like I'm checking in to see if you believe this or it's more of a thought experiment (and one that I didn't write, for example)
And no, it does not follow from "The world is my mind" to "I am talking to myself". It simply means other people (and their minds) are in my mind, and obviously hidden somehow. Just like my subconscious only in a deeper way. We need to start thinking realistically about the mind and not magically like that the brain is made of non-mental physical stuff and then magically the mind appears out of it. That is very faith based and illogical.
If I, for example, are in your mind, I am a part of your mind. That's you. Unless there's some boundary between us, and then you would have the same problems with knowing about things outside your mind, since for you you can only know things that you have no boundary between you and that thing.
IOW it is a solipsism.
And how could something be hidden from an all powerful mind?
Our minds have formed inferences as to what that information at those boundaries refers to, I.e. objects. Slowly our minds piece together through inference, until they can reliably interact with the external world, via communication at those boundaries.
-
- Posts: 6851
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my min
The problem with your solution is he says we cannot know anything about what is outside of the mind. Our knowledge of other minds is incomplete BUT we can learn about other minds through observation. I see someone's hands shaking and I can realize they are nervous, perhaps even if they are not conscious of it. We learn about 'things' outside us all the time. IOW perhaps we know some things via interpenetration of other minds, but it seems like we learn all the time things via perception also. We can learn more than we knew via perception.Dimebag wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 10:43 am I believe he means his mind interpenetrates with other minds. Imagine bubbles touching at their boundaries, and information passing between those boundaries. Thus each bubble mind can know that of other minds through this communication at their boundaries (the sense organs).
Our minds have formed inferences as to what that information at those boundaries refers to, I.e. objects. Slowly our minds piece together through inference, until they can reliably interact with the external world, via communication at those boundaries.
As far as your second paragraph, I don't think you are correct about his or her position. Because he has said that everything that is, is in the mind. So, there is nothing to have a boundary with.
But I appreciate the answer. You actually did the kind of thing I was hoping he would do. Make it clear he understood my issue/criticism/point and respond to it with new information. I hope this can be a role model for him.
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my min
Our brains are pattern recognition machines, and action producing machines.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 11:03 amThe problem with your solution is he says we cannot know anything about what is outside of the mind. Our knowledge of other minds is incomplete BUT we can learn about other minds through observation. I see someone's hands shaking and I can realize they are nervous, perhaps even if they are not conscious of it. We learn about 'things' outside us all the time. IOW perhaps we know some things via interpenetration of other minds, but it seems like we learn all the time things via perception also. We can learn more than we knew via perception.Dimebag wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 10:43 am I believe he means his mind interpenetrates with other minds. Imagine bubbles touching at their boundaries, and information passing between those boundaries. Thus each bubble mind can know that of other minds through this communication at their boundaries (the sense organs).
Our minds have formed inferences as to what that information at those boundaries refers to, I.e. objects. Slowly our minds piece together through inference, until they can reliably interact with the external world, via communication at those boundaries.
As far as your second paragraph, I don't think you are correct about his or her position. Because he has said that everything that is, is in the mind. So, there is nothing to have a boundary with.
But I appreciate the answer. You actually did the kind of thing I was hoping he would do. Make it clear he understood my issue/criticism/point and respond to it with new information. I hope this can be a role model for him.
Essentially our mind is a self contained system, but due to this semi permeability it means information can enter it, and actions can be produced by it, which allows that the system can grow, change and learn.
If our minds were truly self contained with no permeability no information could enter them, and no actions could ever arise due to it.
Just as a cell is both a self contained system but allows nutrients in, and can produce meaningful actions, our own minds also share this property.
I think the problem is, this user thinks they can gain truth through syllogisms but doesn’t see their biases they introduce to each new syllogistic premise. They do not see the dependency of their conclusions based on their biases, and so if they did might choose a different form of reasoning, and maybe add some permeability to their own thought process to allow an updating to occur.
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
I think most people who have an interest in philosophy will get the meaning in the thread title, so your convoluted chain of what I imagine you consider to be logic is not only unnecessary, but actually an obstacle to understanding.Magnolia5275 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 3:15 am Proof:
1. It is not possible to know the unknowable
2. A world outside the knowing is unknowable
3. It is not possible to know a world outside the knowing
4. Mind is knowing
5. It is not possible to know a world outside the mind
6. It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
7. The world is my mind
-
- Posts: 6851
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my min
I'm more or less with you so far. I don't think this fits with his model of reality, but hey, let's see where this goes.Dimebag wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 12:08 pm Our brains are pattern recognition machines, and action producing machines.
Essentially our mind is a self contained system, but due to this semi permeability it means information can enter it, and actions can be produced by it, which allows that the system can grow, change and learn.
Unless solipsism is the case. I suggested his position sounded like solipsism and he hasn't confirmed or countered this.If our minds were truly self contained with no permeability no information could enter them, and no actions could ever arise due to it.
With you.Just as a cell is both a self contained system but allows nutrients in, and can produce meaningful actions, our own minds also share this property.
Yes. I said there were leaps, but this is another way of saying the same thing. In any case, he doesn't seem to notice that portions are analytical - or tautologies. You can't know what can't be known, is a perfectly acceptable paraphrase of one of his premises; and that portions have assumptions (biases) that are not supported. They may be correct. But there are missing pieces in his argument.I think the problem is, this user thinks they can gain truth through syllogisms but doesn’t see their biases they introduce to each new syllogistic premise.
Yes, I haven't give up yet, but his responses to me and FDP are not encouraging. I think people in general overestimate deduction. We know that there have been seemingly self-evident deduction processes that later turned out to be incorrect. This is true in society, in physics, likely all sciences, in social relations, in the humanities.....They do not see the dependency of their conclusions based on their biases, and so if they did might choose a different form of reasoning, and maybe add some permeability to their own thought process to allow an updating to occur.
No problem really, but the words 'proof' and 'prove' is used way too often.
If he means this only to apply to him, well what's the interest to us? If he means we don't exist and there is only his mind, it would help if he would say he is a solipsist? If he is not a solipcist and he thinks this statement applies to all of us....how could be possibly know, since we are not inside his mind. If there is, as you suggested, some interpenetration, great. But if it is only partial, then he can't know the limits of our ability to know things. A look at his other 'proof' related to being God, many more problems come in, because he considers his mind all powerful. If that is the case, there cannot be mere partial interpentration.It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
I'll quote in his other 'proof' because I think it makes his problems even more glaring and is relevant to the one in this thread....
It seems like he is suggesting ontological idealism, in the argument in this thread. Possibly epistemological idealism. And then a kind of rationalism. It pretty much can't be a kind of empiricism. The mind is all there is. It is not learning about reality via experience but via direct contact. Everything is direct contact or no contact.1. We know a world
2. The world we know must be in the mind[A]
3. The world is in the mind
4. The mind is greater than the world
5. The mind is All-Knowing of the world
6. All that is in the mind are its conceptions
7. The world is the mind's creation
8. The mind is All-Powerful
9. The mind is God
10. God exists
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my min
I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.
Sometimes it takes a little time and separation from your own argument to see it objectively.
We can be attached to and defend our ideas like they need to survive.
I am guilty of this from time to time.
I think just about anyone can learn and grow through experience.
But letting go of old ideas can be hard.
All I really care about is if people can learn from each other and come to some shared consensus about our reality.
As to who comes up with the final idea, if we all engage then no single person is responsible, and so cannot take either the blame for their wrong ideas or credit for the right ones.
Sometimes it takes a little time and separation from your own argument to see it objectively.
We can be attached to and defend our ideas like they need to survive.
I am guilty of this from time to time.
I think just about anyone can learn and grow through experience.
But letting go of old ideas can be hard.
All I really care about is if people can learn from each other and come to some shared consensus about our reality.
As to who comes up with the final idea, if we all engage then no single person is responsible, and so cannot take either the blame for their wrong ideas or credit for the right ones.
-
- Posts: 6851
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my min
Sure, and we all make leaps in our thinking. And we also make assumptions that either seem self-evident or we don't see as assumptions.
I'm guilty of pretty much everything - not in terms of action, but attitude - from time to time.I am guilty of this from time to time.
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
The unknower knows the unknowable.Magnolia5275 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 27, 2022 3:15 am Proof:
1. It is not possible to know the unknowable
2. A world outside the knowing is unknowable
3. It is not possible to know a world outside the knowing
4. Mind is knowing
5. It is not possible to know a world outside the mind
6. It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
7. The world is my mind
The unknower requires no mind outside the mind.
The unknower informs the mind, and then the mind knows.
The unknower feels in the literal heart space, informs the mind, and from this, the mind understands.
- Total loss of another is unknown until felt in the heart space, in the chest. This informs the mind, and then the world of loss outside of knowing, is truly known and no longer imagined.
- The feeling in the chest can be such a surge of energy suddenly unleashed, such an intensity, that the body can suffer a heart attack.
- For this reason, don't just willy-nilly reveal really bad news to someone with a bad heart. Be aware that skillful means causes the least harm.
-
- Posts: 4413
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: It is not possible for me to know the world outside my mind
Ludwig had the same problem
-Imp
-Imp