Does the moon exist when no one is looking at it?

[Olga]

This is straight up false.

Vibrations do not require perception.

You're just making unsubstantiated claims. This is not a discussion.

"2+2=5!"
"Apples are square!"



OK, so the Moon actually existed - largely in the form in which we perceive it now - for the last 4 billion years.

Разве вы не ощущаете вибрации? Ощущение - это же человеческое?

Скорее, наоборот - в том виде, в котором мы её не видим. Это же ваше сознание умеет выделять из квантовой пены отдельные объекты.

 

[DaveC426913]

Don't you feel vibrations? Feeling is human, right?

You've got cause-effect backwards.

I sense vibrations because they occur objectively.

For billions of years sand crumbled on beaches, and avalanches started in mountain snow banks - because of vibrations in the Earth.

Rather, the opposite - in a form in which we do not see it. It is your consciousness that can single out individual objects from the quantum foam.

This is just more pseudoscience nonsense with no basis in logic. I'd like to suggest you pick up a book or two on the subjects of philosophy and cognition.

"2+2=5!"
"No it doesn't."

This is boring. You claim you went to university. You are smarter than this.

 

[Olga]

You've got cause-effect backwards.

I sense vibrations because they occur objectively.

For billions of years sand crumbled on beaches, and avalanches started in mountain snow banks - because of vibrations in the Earth.



This is just more pseudoscience nonsense with no basis in logic. I'd like to suggest you pick up a book or two on the subjects of philosophy and cognition.

"2+2=5!"
"No it doesn't."

This is boring. You claim you went to university. You are smarter than this.

Дэйв, вы не хотите меня понять. Я говорю о том, что мир сам по себе бесформен, бесцветен, беззвучен и безвиден. Тот мир, к которому мы привыкли, который мы ощущаем, моделируется в нашем сознании.

 

[DaveC426913]

Dave, you don't want to understand me.

Do you think that just because a fanciful idea pops into your head I'm supposed to agree with it? Is that how discussion works in Russia?

I'm saying that the world itself is formless, colorless, soundless and sightless.

And I'm saying this is trivial at best, and that you're just making this up because it suits your pre-existing beliefs about God and the Bible.

You keep using weasel words - jumping back and forth across the line of objectivity. Yes, sight, sound and feel are created in the mind. So what?Light, wavelengths and vibrations are objectively real. "Sound" is simply what we call vibrations that have reached our brains - our subjective experience of an objective phenomenon.

I'm not interested in helping you convince yourself that Genesis is a rational way to view the world.

 

[Olga]

Do you think that just because a fanciful idea pops into your head I'm supposed to agree with it? Is that how discussion works in Russia?


And I'm saying this is trivial at best, and that you're just making this up because it suits your pre-existing beliefs about God and the Bible.

You keep using weasel words - jumping back and forth across the line of objectivity. Yes, sight, sound and feel are created in the mind. So what?Light, wavelengths and vibrations are objectively real. "Sound" is simply what we call vibrations that have reached our brains - our subjective experience of an objective phenomenon.

I'm not interested in helping you convince yourself that Genesis is a rational way to view the world.

Ну, о.к., давайте пойдём от основ. Вы говорите:"свет, длина волны и колебания объективно реальны". Это всё волны, которые распространяются в пространстве и времени, верно? Время - это промежуток из прошлого в настоящее, верно? Вы не можете видеть прошлое, верно? Вы моделируете время в своём сознании, верно? Вы не можете доказать объективно, что прошлое именно такое, как вы себе его представляете, верно? Вы просто берёте это на веру, потому что все так делают, так принято, верно?

 

[TheVat]

Whenever people claim that consciousness is required for something to exist, I have to wonder how they test that hypothesis?

I think an experimental setup is available. Rent a seaworthy vessel and travel out to an empty stretch of the ocean, not on shipping lanes, so there is no other conscious being from horizon to horizon. Hold a deadman switch, which is wired to a shotgun which is pointed at a watermelon, after you have injected yourself with a powerful sedative.

In the normal view of objective reality, when you are unconscious from the drug, your hand will relax its grip, the switch will close, the gun will fire (let's say after ten seconds, due to a delay timer), and the watermelon will be blasted. You will wake up later, with the wounded watermelon already having happened.

Now, if consciousness is required for things to exist, then the whole experimental setup will disappear while you are unconscious and will not reappear (and you will not notice your grip on the dm switch has relaxed) until you start to awaken. After ten seconds, when you are fairly awake, the gun will discharge and watermelon goop rain down upon the sea. And you will witness this event.

This experiment should determine which theory of reality to go with, pretty decisively. (if you're really confident about the consc=existence theory, of course, you could just point the shotgun at the bottom of the boat, fully expecting to awaken and switch off the timer before the gun fires)

 

[Olga]

I think an experimental setup is available. Rent a seaworthy vessel and travel out to an empty stretch of the ocean, not on shipping lanes, so there is no other conscious being from horizon to horizon. Hold a deadman switch, which is wired to a shotgun which is pointed at a watermelon, after you have injected yourself with a powerful sedative.

In the normal view of objective reality, when you are unconscious from the drug, your hand will relax its grip, the switch will close, the gun will fire (let's say after ten seconds, due to a delay timer), and the watermelon will be blasted. You will wake up later, with the wounded watermelon already having happened.

Now, if consciousness is required for things to exist, then the whole experimental setup will disappear while you are unconscious and will not reappear (and you will not notice your grip on the dm switch has relaxed) until you start to awaken. After ten seconds, when you are fairly awake, the gun will discharge and watermelon goop rain down upon the sea. And you will witness this event.

This experiment should determine which theory of reality to go with, pretty decisively. (if you're really confident about the consc=existence theory, of course, you could just point the shotgun at the bottom of the boat, fully expecting to awaken and switch off the timer before the gun fires)

Откуда вы узнаете, что всё это не было смоделировано вашим сознанием? Хотите головоломку? Представьте, что вы живёте в мультиверсе, и существует огромное множество вариантов событий. И вы всегда можете вернуться в любой момент времени, и изменить ход событий. Как вы об этом узнаете?

 

[gmilam]

I think an experimental setup is available. Rent a seaworthy vessel and travel out to an empty stretch of the ocean, not on shipping lanes, so there is no other conscious being from horizon to horizon. Hold a deadman switch, which is wired to a shotgun which is pointed at a watermelon, after you have injected yourself with a powerful sedative.

In the normal view of objective reality, when you are unconscious from the drug, your hand will relax its grip, the switch will close, the gun will fire (let's say after ten seconds, due to a delay timer), and the watermelon will be blasted. You will wake up later, with the wounded watermelon already having happened.

Now, if consciousness is required for things to exist, then the whole experimental setup will disappear while you are unconscious and will not reappear (and you will not notice your grip on the dm switch has relaxed) until you start to awaken. After ten seconds, when you are fairly awake, the gun will discharge and watermelon goop rain down upon the sea. And you will witness this event.

This experiment should determine which theory of reality to go with, pretty decisively. (if you're really confident about the consc=existence theory, of course, you could just point the shotgun at the bottom of the boat, fully expecting to awaken and switch off the timer before the gun fires)

And if you wake up and the watermelon has been blown to smithereens, this proves that the watermelon is (er..., was) conscious!

 

[DaveC426913]

Well, okay, let's start from the basics. You say, "light, wavelength, and vibrations are objectively real." They're all waves that travel through space and time, right? Time is the gap from the past to the present, right? You can't see the past, right? You're simulating time in your mind, right? You can't objectively prove that the past is exactly as you imagine it, right? You're just taking it on faith because that's what everyone else does, that's what everyone else does, right?

This is the 'brain in a vat' conjecture: that I am a disembodied brain, floating in a vat of goo, fed all my experiences - including all you other people - through tubes and wires.

 

[Olga]

This is the 'brain in a vat' conjecture: that I am a disembodied brain, floating in a vat of goo, fed all my experiences - including all you other people - through tubes and wires.

Угу, был у меня один знакомый, мечтал плавать в ванне с пивом.

 

[river]

The Universe existed before life . Without the Universe life couldn't exist in the first place .
the Universe has Space and the Periodic table and Life . Hence the Galaxies , Suns and Planets etc. Planets and maybe some moons allow life to take hold . Without which life would float around aimlessly in this Universe , it would never grow , evolve .

To the title of the thread , we are this anthropomorphic stage in our thinking , where everything that exists is because we exist . Not mature thinking .

 

[DaveC426913]

The Universe existed before life . Without the Universe life couldn't exist in the first place .
the Universe has Space and the Periodic table and Life . Hence the Galaxies , Suns and Planets etc. Planets and maybe some moons allow life to take hold . Without which life would float around aimlessly in this Universe , it would never grow , evolve .

To the title of the thread , we are this anthropomorphic stage in our thinking , where everything that exists is because we exist . Not mature thinking .

That ... is actually not entirely nonsense...

 

[river]

Of course not . There is nothing nonsense about it .

 

[DaveC426913]

Of course not . There is nothing nonsense about it .

I know. I'm going to mark this day on my calendar.

 

[Olga]

The Universe existed before life . Without the Universe life couldn't exist in the first place .
the Universe has Space and the Periodic table and Life . Hence the Galaxies , Suns and Planets etc. Planets and maybe some moons allow life to take hold . Without which life would float around aimlessly in this Universe , it would never grow , evolve .

To the title of the thread , we are this anthropomorphic stage in our thinking , where everything that exists is because we exist . Not mature thinking .

Мы пепел сгоревших звёзд. Звучит романтично.