Do "minds" generate the world around it? — Cobra
Huh?A proper sentence has a subject and verb for minimum. — Corvus
So? "Okay" isn't a sentence. "Aha" isn't a sentence. "Yes" isn't a sentence. "Yes, sir" isn't a sentence. But "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" is a sentence. Apparently, though, "So?", "And?", "Okay", "Aha", "Yes", and "Yes, sir" all communicate something meaningful in English, yet "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" does not.A sentence requires at least a subject and verb to be qualified as one. — Corvus
Twas brillig and the slithy toves did gire and gimble in the wabe.Being a native English speaker doesn't mean that how he communicates with English is always correct or right. — Corvus
Well technically he's right. It's a minor sentence. Whether or not it's a "proper sentence" sounds like something we shouldn't really care about.He was insisting "And" was a sentence. I told him that it is not. — Corvus
You seem to be missing a foundational point. Were it not for a "bandwagon of native speakers of English", there would be no such thing as English. Real linguists study how native language speakers speak; real lexicographers document how native language speakers use words; and so on. The definition of the language is in the commonality established by this bandwagon. (And just so there's no confusion, the context of "correct" here is simply "correct English").You seemed to have joined this "bandwagon of native speakers of English, and if one is not, then he must be wrong". — Corvus
Good. In the future, you should not care about this stuff at the start. There's literally no point in telling someone about "proper sentences" having nouns and verbs. We're all speaking English; if something clear is being communicated, there's not really anything left to say. Just focus on content.Anyway, it is not my interest debating about this with you anymore. — Corvus
To be able to validate these concepts, you must first define what reality is. Does reality means the World? Or just external matters outside of your perception? Can you ever define what reality and World is? Tell us first what your definition of reality and world is. — Corvus
That is my question I ask to all scholars who acknowledge science as the final truth?
How can you differentiate the reality of the external (World) and the internal (In your mind)? Is science able to discriminate the two? And what evidence must we search for to discriminate the two?
To answer these questions will validate scientific finding without doubt.
It’s a paradox that I struggle with in my mind and why I am on this forum. — SteveMinjares
I am just a member of this forum.Who are you — Corvus
By whose authority? You're just another member of this forum.No you don't speak in minor sentence or a word in philosophical discussion. — Corvus
But I wanted to ask you even before that, what is your definition of reality. Does reality mean the World, the universe, or simply things around you, which is also called as external matters? — Corvus
I doubt my eyes but I see, I doubt my ears but I hear, I doubt touch but I feel, I doubt my nose but I smell, I doubt my mouth but I taste. I only trust what the spirit witness.
What am I?
Answer that question for me and that is my reality. — SteveMinjares
And the other question is, is reality then always private? Does it then exist within only your perception?
So, if you cannot perceive any of them, does it mean that reality does not exist? The good old idealist vs. realist arguments, but I am still struggling to know which one is definitely correct. — Corvus
The answer to the question is no. No sensation, no reasoning of any kind is possible. Rocks do not reason. No reasoning no argument for validation is possible. — Athena
Just remember that most people are trying to form rulesets that can reliably predict the future, or follow some shared understanding, or describe things in accordance with ideas like logic, reason and etc. — Judaka
This may sound like a ridiculous scenario but bare with me. I understand I am transitioning away from the topic of spirituality to more like science fiction but “When in Rome” right?
I disagree with that statement due to the possibility of telepathic communication and how it may exist now through nature. This presumption was brought on because scientists discovered evidence of its existence through there research.
This discovery or potential of this discovery may change how we perceive reality.
If telepathic communication is possible then sensory input may become obsolete or not necessary to perceive reality.
“Scientists Prove That Telepathic Communication Is Within Reach“ — SteveMinjares
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.