'No humans = no reality as it is known by humans.'Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Jun 05, 2023 5:00 amI have already explained to you many times.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Sun Jun 04, 2023 3:12 pm 'Don't show us examples of what we call real things, such as rocks and stones and trees and dogs and so on. I want to see reality itself - the whole thing. Show us reality! What? You can't? Ah, so reality doesn't exist, except in your head!'
'Don't show us examples of dropped things hitting the floor. Show us gravity - the thing itself!'
Face palm.
To repeat my question for VA, and not the fucking moron who feels the need to squirt out one inane question after another to get my attention:
What evidence do you have for the astonishingly unscientific claim that no humans = no reality?
There are two senses of reality, i.e.
1. FSK-ed reality [evolutionary embedded in all humans]
2. P-realist reality independent of the existence of humans.
I have demonstrated your version of reality in 2 is illusory.
PH's Philosophical Realism is Illusory
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39992
PH's What is Fact [independent] is Illusory
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39577
My FSK-ed reality is most realistic.
FSK-ed implied it CANNOT be independent of the existence of humans.
Therefore if there are no humans, there is no FSK-ed reality.
No shit!