How can you imagine a flying elephant without seeing it? Your point was that either you were seeing or imagining a flying elephant, and it is REAL. My point was that ok, I am not denying your seeing it or imagining it, but it must be UNREAL. Who is right here on the basis of common sense, logical and epistemological view?False. You asked me the question using that term regarding my seeing an elephant flying (not ‘imagining’ one flying). What is sensible to me is real to me unless I recognise an illusion. What is a delusion is obviously beyond my examination (because a delusion is believed). — I like sushi
Was just pointing out, what you claim as Real in your perception might be Unreal. Due to the nature of our sense organs, we sometimes perceive Unreal objects.What is sensible to me is real to me unless I recognise an illusion. What is a delusion is obviously beyond my examination (because a delusion is believed). — I like sushi
I am not denying your seeing it or imagining it, but it must be UNREAL. — Corvus
ou see how you see. It is a matter of subjectivity.
What you see and claim to know is necessarily limited. — I like sushi
But what if it is not? Of course if I said to you I saw a flying elephant you would question my mental faculties … but maybe I actually did and there are genetically modified elephants flying around somewhere. — I like sushi
We call it a nonsense.I was taking an extreme example to highlight that there are grey areas. — I like sushi
You can begin wherever you like, but if anyone will agree with you is another matter. No one is quibbling about how or what you see in your perception, but claiming it is REAL would be regarded as a fallacy or illusion.100% subjectivity is pretty much where we all begin. We are not given a manual about how to perceive reality or what reality is. — I like sushi
No. I think there are fallacies in your claims.You think there are no grey areas? — I like sushi
I am not sure on other cases, but I am only commenting on your case, because your claim was found to be groundless.You seriously think there are no instances where someone has said something is nonsense only to later be proven wrong? Strange. — I like sushi
Indeed it is pointless to dip into this and that threads in the forums for exchanging light hearted negative comments without any interest, enthusiasm or good arguments for the topic. It would be waste of time on you and the others too. All the best. :grin:Anyway, this is just degenerated into pointless back and forth so I am out. Bye :) — I like sushi
Hence, we try to seek justification on our beliefs and perception.We're sometimes wrong about things; what, then, made us wrong, but whatever is indeed the case? — jorndoe
Do you have logical explanations for your belief? — Corvus
when one believes in the existence of the world, but says there is no justified belief in the world when not perceiving it — Corvus
To a stupid, everything sounds and looks like stupid.Why would you believe something for which you believe you have justification for believing? Sounds like the definition of stupidity to me. — Janus
You don't seem to have understood the question. Do you believe in absolute accuracy on everything you experience?Everything I experience gives me reason to believe the world does not depend on my perception of it. Perhaps you believe it doesn't give you such reason; if so, I can only conclude that you are a fool. — Janus
To immaterial idealists, the world is just perception. When they are not perceiving the world, they don't believe it exists. But to the realists, they tend to believe the world keep exists even when they don't perceive it. Beliefs are psychological state. You either believe something or not with or without reasons. But are there beliefs that need rational justification? Or do we tend to believe in something due to our nature as Hume wrote?The only thing I have ever known myself to exist on/in, is the world. It would be far more unlikely that at times i'm not perceiving it (unconscious ,whatever..) it has disappeared, than it would be that I am simply not perceiving it because my senses are not trained it. — AmadeusD
I suppose it depends on the definition of the world as well. Yes, the definition of the world, the concept of existence, and the nature of belief.I suppose the other thing is, in what scenario are we not sensible of the world in one way or another? A deprivation tank still provides a temperature etc... It's just aligned so closely with homeostasis its hard to tell. It hasn't actually removed stimuli entirely. — AmadeusD
I suppose the other thing is, in what scenario are we not sensible of the world in one way or another? A deprivation tank still provides a temperature etc... It's just aligned so closely with homeostasis its hard to tell. It hasn't actually removed stimuli entirely. — AmadeusD
Do you believe in absolute accuracy on everything you experience? — Corvus
Well, whenever you return here, all you ever keep shouting is that whatever you read is fool and dimwit. How could anyone help you? :lol:What does the "absolute accuracy" in regard to experience even mean? Perhaps you are looking for some absolute certainty? It's a fool's errand, a dimwit's folly. See if you can dig your pointless hole even deeper; should be fun to watch. :rofl: — Janus
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.