Descartes: “I think therefore I am”

[NotreDame]

How is it reasonable. How do you know the lizard people living under the north pole did not put that thought in your head?

Des Cartes position is your “thought” above or that you “think” the above requires you to exist to have the “thought” or to “think.”

“of a surety I myself did exist merely because I thought of something. But there is some deceiver or other, very powerful and very cunning, who ever employs his ingenuity in deceiving me. Then without doubt I exist also if he deceives me, and let him deceive me as much as he will, he can never cause me to be nothing so long as I think that I am something.”

 

[NotreDame]

No, It is just another crappy attempt to prove there is a god.

According to Descartes We cannot conceive God without existence, then it follows that existence is inseparable as of Him, therefore, He exists.
And how does he prove our existence, with a cliche, I think......

Not a completely accurate representation, as Des Cartes uses the approach to establish a basis of human knowledge of the world, and the existence of other things, including God.

 

[soylentgreen]

Des Cartes position is your “thought” above or that you “think” the above requires you to exist to have the “thought” or to “think.”

“of a surety I myself did exist merely because I thought of something. But there is some deceiver or other, very powerful and very cunning, who ever employs his ingenuity in deceiving me. Then without doubt I exist also if he deceives me, and let him deceive me as much as he will, he can never cause me to be nothing so long as I think that I am something.”

If you can question whether you exist in the first place, then why cannot you also question whether the thought came from you?

 

[soylentgreen]

Not a completely accurate representation, as Des Cartes uses the approach to establish a basis of human knowledge of the world, and the existence of other things, including God.

True it is more a synopsis of a very bad argument for the existence of a god.

 

[NotreDame]

If you can question whether you exist in the first place, then why cannot you also question whether the thought came from you?

Des Cartes logic says there has to be a “you” to exist for someone/something to possibly plant the thought in your head/in you.

Des Cartes inquisitiveness of what does or doesn’t exist, how may we know, etcetera, led him to conclude there had to be a him, a cogito, to think it at all.

 

[NotreDame]

True it is more a synopsis of a very bad argument for the existence of a god.

Have you read Des Cartes’ argument?

 

[soylentgreen]

Des Cartes logic says there has to be a “you” to exist for someone/something to possibly plant the thought in your head/in you.

Des Cartes inquisitiveness of what does or doesn’t exist, how may we know, etcetera, led him to conclude there had to be a him, a cogito, to think it at all.

No, if we are to go down that rabbit hole then there is no need for a you. Just an it. Something has to do the thinking but not necessarily a you.

Have you read Des Cartes’ argument?

Yes and dismiss it as just another shitty attempt to prove a god.

 

[NatMorton]

An oldie:

Rene Descartes walks into a bar and orders a drink.
When he finishes his drink, the bartender asks him if he would like another.
Descartes replies, “No, I think not,” and disappears in a puff of logic.

 

[Mithrae]

It all might be a simulation. No it mightn’t. That is physically impossible due to the energy requirements.

You're only imagining that there are 'energy requirements' because of the science built on 'observations' from within the simulation. The only way you can assert absolutely that 'energy requirements' prevent it from being a simulation is to first assume that it's not a simulation so that the science built from it is valid, which is obviously circular. Descartes' demon doesn't have any energy requirements.

 

[watsup]

You're only imagining that there are 'energy requirements' because of the science built on 'observations' from within the simulation. The only way you can assert absolutely that 'energy requirements' prevent it from being a simulation is to first assume that it's not a simulation so that the science built from it is valid, which is obviously circular. Descartes' demon doesn't have any energy requirements.

What simulation?

 

[Revelation]

It was a time when "God" was pretty much an assumption in philosophy

well he does exist AND so do i.

i speak The Truth, and therefore i exist.

(and among most everyone) and I suppose that you risked your reputation if you did not at least attempt to use philosophy to "prove" that it existed.

speaking Truth is infinitely more important than 'reputation'; people are Fickle, some days they will 'like you' and other days not so much.

why bother.

Truth stands forever.

.

 

[watsup]

well he does exist AND so do i.

i speak The Truth, and therefore i exist.



speaking Truth is infinitely more important than 'reputation'; people are Fickle, some days they will 'like you' and other days not so much.

why bother.

Truth stands forever.

.

Truth is determined by an objective analysis of alternatives. It is not simply declared no matter how often you try to claim so.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

I drink, therefore I am.

No, that's why you pee.

 

[Allan]

No, that's why you pee.

You only really rent beer.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

You only really rent beer.

I know some people who own it, though.