Language, Descartes and Existence

Me thinks either you all misunderstand what I believe to be Descarte's most important contribution to philosophy: "Everything that exists must have a cause for that existence"

So lets assume that this world, this universe, everything, from the rats to the black holes to the supernovas to simple ameoba are really the imagination of one person----It really cannot be that of two people for then u will have to to explain how their imaginations merge--this person or thing would have to be really imaginative. But that is really besides the point. The point is that, that imagination would have to have been caused or created by something. So something exists. if something exists, then it is caused by something. If there was nothing, then the concept of nothing would not exist. For nothing would imagine us or us imagine it us to see, or whatever ....


It is funny to me when people constantly complain about the limitations of language---U think through langauge. U cannot supersede the language of your thought. So saying that language limits you is a false.

As to whether or not we exist--- lets us first see what the word 'exist' means: From Websters

To have actual being; be real.
To have life; live: one of the worst actors that ever existed.
To live at a minimal level; subsist: barely enough income on which to exist.
To continue to be; persist: old customs that still exist in rural areas.
To be present under certain circumstances or in a specified place; occur: “Wealth and poverty exist in every demographic category” (Thomas G. Exter).

----------------------------------------------------------------
What of real:
Being or occurring in fact or actuality; having verifiable existence: real objects; a real illness.
True and actual; not imaginary, alleged, or ideal: real people, not ghosts; a film based on real life.
Of or founded on practical matters and concerns: a recent graduate experiencing the real world for the first time.
Genuine and authentic; not artificial or spurious: real mink; real humility.
Being no less than what is stated; worthy of the name: a real friend.
Free of pretense, falsehood, or affectation: tourists hoping for a real experience on the guided tour.
Not to be taken lightly; serious: in real trouble.
Philosophy. Existing objectively in the world regardless of subjectivity or conventions of thought or language.
Relating to, being, or having value reckoned by actual purchasing power: real income; real growth.
Physics. Of, relating to, or being an image formed by light rays that converge in space.
Mathematics. Of, relating to, or being a real number.
Law. Of or relating to stationary or fixed property, such as buildings or land.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you don't understand it up to this point let me explain. To exist simply means to be in the 'real.' The real simply means something that exists. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!:

Seriously, for example in the mathematical sense, (-1)^1/2 exists
in one world and not the other. Why? Simple; the rules governing the two 'worlds' are dfferent. Or for example Newtonian physics and Ecludian geometry are 'true' for their 'world'

What does it mean? It means that our world is defined by our 5 senses and our imagination. We cannot and must not talk of any other beacuse that would be defeatng the purpose.

So if you can imagine something does it mean that it exists? Yes and no. If the thing that is imagined is conscious of itself regrdless of whether as an imagination or not, then that thing exists. But existence then again is a definition of our world. Which means that we exist because we are conscious of ourselves---in our world--existence.

As for possibility and impossibility; if it is possible for the impossible to be impossible and it is also (im)possible for the impossibility of possibility then possibility is a concept that 'philosophers' should not waste time on. For possibility and impossibility are circular.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

oh, sorry westmorris. I didn't notice you'd put the "I am therefore I think" idea up there already. I would have given you credit for it in this thread instead of Ayn Rand, cause I quote her too much on this sight already.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This was a good post! But, the impossibility of possibility seems possible. Is this why you put the "im" in parentheses? I could say it's possible that I may die tomorrow, but if I don't die tomorrow, it means my prediction was actually impossible. Or does it?

Hmm. No, you're right. It was still possible in my context of knowledge. I guess the whole trick of philosophy is drawing the line between "possibility" and "probability". and then between that and certainty.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.