There is NO spoon!!

hahahah thats hilarious

but yeah no i see what your saying but its all shit like that when you overthink life, your gonna go nuts
 
what about the whole " i think i am therefore i am" I have to exist in some reality if i am able to think i exist, even if I'm just some fragment of some kid with autism's imagination, that's still existing right?
 
this movie has all the answers

shallow_hal.jpg


 
right on dude, yea im a 4th psych student so we talked about this in relation to the psychological moment. a little different approach but pretty much coming to the same conclusions.
 
This thread is a little too idealist for me, you and your mind-dependencies and sensible things...

If anyone's interested, read George Berkeley, one of the few philosophers who actually argued for idealist monism. He famously held that 'sensible things exist in their being percieved', and that there was no material substance, only immaterial substance, such as ideas.
 
I just finished my first year of philosophy, I think I'm going to take it all the way. David Hume's teleological argument for the existence of God was a good read last semester, I should definately look into him a little more. I just wrote on Locke and Berkeley in an exam a few days ago, although I don't agree with their views, it's fascinating stuff.
 
we all exist and there is a fuckin spoon. and that shit about how we exist in the future... no we dont exist in the future maybe our thoughts are slower than our bodies by like .0005 seconds but our bodies are still in the present our thoughts just lag. your brain needs time to take things in but its not like your body is moving in the future or anything your body only moves when your mind tells it to react, therefore your mind and body go together.
 
'sense', eh...

Senses are the only faculties through which you are able to percieve the world; considering this, can you guarantee that these sensible things exist outside of your mind?
 
youre all missing the point, the only reason that people question whether or not one sees the spoon is because nobody wants to see you spoon in the first place. Observing someone spoon with your sister is a no and nobody wants to see that. then again..

but then hey, if someone wants to spoon with you, why not? right?
 
you can feel, taste, smell, see, and if you hit it you can hear the spoon. Isnt that enough proof to proove that what you refer to as a spoon exists.

If somebody stabs you with a spoon it will hurt. Does the spoon exist if it causes harm to you? pretty sure
 
You're still considering senses, which are mind-dependent, meaning that they cannot exist outside of a mind. You haven't put forward any arguments for objective, or mind-independent, matter. However, it is sufficient to say that mind-dependent things exist, 'sensible things exist in their being percieved'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top