Poll: Do you exist?
Poll Options
View poll results: Do you exist?
Yes of course
82 56%
No
42 29%
Maybe?
55 38%
Whoomit
43 29%
Voters: 146.
Page 1 of 2
#1
I've always wondered about some ugers, So I'm making a poll.

Please answer it as accurately as you can.


Note: I don't mean superficial, I'm asking if you exist or not.
It's over simplified, So what!

Quote by eGraham
I'm going to be on top of what is called a knob
Quote by theguitarist
Big ones can be fun in some ways but generally, they are a pain in the ass.
Quote by Wolfinator-x
I don't know what is going on in this thread or why I have an erection.
#6
I made this thread two days ago on another forum. Deja vu. I didn't get any particularly amazing philosophical responses. Anyway, yeah I'm real and so is everyone else; eventhough, I can't objectively prove it.
"Dude, am I really thinking or am I, just like, thinking that I'm thinking?" -Bill Nye

CHIMPS>WOLVES

Quote by progdude93
I don't believe the Big Bang
#7
Quote by HypernovaGlow
I made this thread two days ago on another forum. Deja vu. I didn't get any particularly amazing philosophical responses. Anyway, yeah I'm real and so is everyone else; eventhough, I can't objectively prove it.


Ultimate-Guitar's official ad-bot 'Obseceneairwaves' is capable of using your browsing history to create threads that pander to your individual interests, thus increasing your interest in the site and increasing advertising revenue.
#8
Quote by HypernovaGlow
eventhough, I can't objectively prove it.


That's why I'm asking
It's over simplified, So what!

Quote by eGraham
I'm going to be on top of what is called a knob
Quote by theguitarist
Big ones can be fun in some ways but generally, they are a pain in the ass.
Quote by Wolfinator-x
I don't know what is going on in this thread or why I have an erection.
#9
Quote by whywefight
Ultimate-Guitar's official ad-bot 'Obseceneairwaves' is capable of using your browsing history to create threads that pander to your individual interests, thus increasing your interest in the site and increasing advertising revenue.


It's over simplified, So what!

Quote by eGraham
I'm going to be on top of what is called a knob
Quote by theguitarist
Big ones can be fun in some ways but generally, they are a pain in the ass.
Quote by Wolfinator-x
I don't know what is going on in this thread or why I have an erection.
#12
Anyone who voted 'no' or 'maybe' is a **** trying to seem intelligent.
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#13
Yes I totally agree! This dress will make it so much better and also its cheap. When I bought mine it only cost 9999.9$. Only reason I could afford that is because google pays me for doing surveys. Can make more then 50 cent each year..bit/pgkrf
#14
Quote by Todd Hart
Anyone who voted 'no' or 'maybe' is a **** trying to seem intelligent.


#15
I do. Can't say the same about all other things. Isn't everything just a synthesis of visual and tactile perceptions?
#16
Rene Descartes was a drunken fart, "I drink therefore I am."
Quote by Todd Hart
Anyone who voted 'no' or 'maybe' is a **** trying to seem intelligent.

I thought I was just trying to take the piss but I guess you must know what I was trying to say more than myself, so I'll take your word for it.
West Ham United
Last edited by King Donkey at Nov 6, 2013,
#18
Quote by progdude93
**** Descartes. Man was a total moron.

Vous etes une poopoo.

In Latin: proge et dookus.

BOOM-SHAKALAKALAKA-BOOM-SHAKALAKUNGA
#19
Quote by progdude93
**** Descartes. Man was a total moron.



There is a lot to hate in Descartes. But nevertheless, unless you want to argue that something can think without existing, that argument seems pretty decent.
RIP Gooze

cats
#20
I haven't read Descartes since high school, so I can't remember all my issues with it.

But here's one: I think, therefore I am isn't necessarily true. If something thinks, something is. I'll grant you that. But if you're trying to prove anything about existence and identity (and that perception isn't all a lie), you'll have to do much better than that.
#22
Quote by progdude93
I haven't read Descartes since high school, so I can't remember all my issues with it.

But here's one: I think, therefore I am isn't necessarily true. If something thinks, something is. I'll grant you that. But if you're trying to prove anything about existence and identity (and that perception isn't all a lie), you'll have to do much better than that.


What's the difference between something that 'is' and something that exists?
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#24
Quote by progdude93
I haven't read Descartes since high school, so I can't remember all my issues with it.

But here's one: I think, therefore I am isn't necessarily true. If something thinks, something is. I'll grant you that. But if you're trying to prove anything about existence and identity (and that perception isn't all a lie), you'll have to do much better than that.

doesn't matter, that wasn't his point. he wasn't as into grammar as you are and he was faced with that same objection in his lifetime and wasn't fazed
#25
Quote by mulefish
'I think, therefor I am'


rocks don't exist!

Anarchy!
It's over simplified, So what!

Quote by eGraham
I'm going to be on top of what is called a knob
Quote by theguitarist
Big ones can be fun in some ways but generally, they are a pain in the ass.
Quote by Wolfinator-x
I don't know what is going on in this thread or why I have an erection.
#26
Quote by Todd Hart
Anyone who voted 'no' or 'maybe' is a **** trying to seem intelligent.


Or they might be an intelligent person trying to appear like a **** trying to seem intelligent, as part of an elaborate double-bluff.

I voted 'yes' and 'no'.
#27
Quote by Obsceneairwaves
rocks don't exist!

Anarchy!


Not from their perspective, no.
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#28
Quote by Todd Hart
What's the difference between something that 'is' and something that exists?


whoosh

Quote by captaincrunk
doesn't matter, that wasn't his point. he wasn't as into grammar as you are and he was faced with that same objection in his lifetime and wasn't fazed


that's why I hate metaphysicians. spinoza, descartes, schopenhauer can all choke on dicks and die. well, again.

Quote by captaincrunk
says the guy who didn't invent geometrical calculus


not my fault I was born too late \

edit: also, wasn't it Descartes who believed we can understand physics a priori because physics is just geometry and something else (I think it was motion.. but I'm not sure)?

Quote by Todd Hart
Not from their perspective, no.


But rocks have minds and the attribute of thought
Last edited by progdude93 at Nov 6, 2013,
#30
Well, the ability for me to rationalise the ontological features around me AND my ability to recognise that I am capable of doing so should be sufficient enough to prove that I'm real.


I'm just ****ing around. I don't exist. Hi! I'm God.
#31
I'm just a figment of Whoomit's imagination.
Squier "VMC" Stratocaster
PRS SE Singlecut
tc electronic polytune
CMAT MODS Signa Drive
Blakemore Effects Deus Ex Machina
DIY gaussmarkov Dr. Boogey
EHX Small Clone
Mooer ShimVerb
DIY Beavis Devolt
T-REX Fuel Tank Chameleon
Ampeg GVT52-112
#32
Quote by progdude93
whoosh


Excellent explanation.

But rocks have minds and the attribute of thought


Their lack of mind is exactly my point.
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#33
Quote by Todd Hart
Excellent explanation.


It doesn't need explanation. Crunk got it just fine.

Quote by Todd Hart
Their lack of mind is exactly my point.


Also whoosh. But this one is deserving of explanation because it's more obscure. Many prominent metaphysicians like Spinoza were panpsychists. Meaning they believed everything has a mind and thought. Their thought is far more limited. I don't remember exactly what a rock's thoughts would consist of (maybe as simple as "I am a rock," but I'm not sure).
#34
Quote by progdude93
It doesn't need explanation. Crunk got it just fine.


Crunk just mocked how stupid and unfazing the pointless semantic wankery of saying 'is existant=/=does exist' is...

Also whoosh. But this one is deserving of explanation because it's more obscure. Many prominent metaphysicians like Spinoza were panpsychists. Meaning they believed everything has a mind and thought. Their thought is far more limited. I don't remember exactly what a rock's thoughts would consist of (maybe as simple as "I am a rock," but I'm not sure).


Which is why it's a good thing my opinions are not all defendant on Spinoza's, so how about you actually address the points of people you talk to rather than say 'Well this person also held that view and he believed this silly proposition, therefore your view is wrong'. What kind of a dumb way to try to conduct a conversation is that?
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#35
Quote by Todd Hart
Crunk just mocked how stupid and unfazing the pointless semantic wankery of saying 'is existant=/=does exist' is...


No he didn't. Your reading comprehension is subpar. Or your grasp of obvious philosophical concepts. You can try again if you wish.

Here's a hint. The focus isn't on "exist," it's on "I."

Quote by Todd Hart
Which is why it's a good thing my opinions are not all defendant on Spinoza's, so how about you actually address the points of people you talk to rather than say 'Well this person also held that view and he believed this silly proposition, therefore your view is wrong'. What kind of a dumb way to try to conduct a conversation is that?


Jesus Christ, I'm not even remotely supporting Spinoza's ideas, the sarcastic eyeroll wasn't directed at you, but at the ridiculous notion that rocks have minds and are capable of thought.
#36
Quote by progdude93
No he didn't. Your reading comprehension is subpar. Or your grasp of obvious philosophical concepts. You can try again if you wish.

Here's a hint. The focus isn't on "exist," it's on "I."


What? I was replying to 'I think, therefore I am isn't necessarily true. If something thinks, something is. I'll grant you that.' which clearly proposes that there is a difference between 'I am' and 'something is' beyond the the narrative mode. I don't give a crap about Descarte's formulation of the problem, hence why I didn't use it. I don't see any value in wasting a single moment trying to come up with a proof of existence. It's the height of frivolity.

Jesus Christ, I'm not even remotely supporting Spinoza's ideas, the sarcastic eyeroll wasn't directed at you, but at the ridiculous notion that rocks have minds and are capable of thought.


I didn't at all imply that you were, and equally didn't imply that rocks have minds - hell, I highlighted the opposite; without being observed by mind nothing can be comprehended or said to exist.
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#37
Quote by Todd Hart
What? I was replying to 'I think, therefore I am isn't necessarily true. If something thinks, something is. I'll grant you that.' which clearly proposes that there is a difference between 'I am' and 'something is' beyond the the narrative mode. I don't give a crap about Descarte's formulation of the problem, hence why I didn't use it. I don't see any value in wasting a single moment trying to come up with a proof of existence. It's the height of frivolity.


You're still not getting it.

Quote by Todd Hart
I didn't at all imply that you were, and equally didn't imply that rocks have minds - hell, I highlighted the opposite; without being observed by mind nothing can be comprehended or said to exist.


now this is directed at you. As I said earlier, your reading comprehension is subpar.
#39
I think I think


I think?
It's over simplified, So what!

Quote by eGraham
I'm going to be on top of what is called a knob
Quote by theguitarist
Big ones can be fun in some ways but generally, they are a pain in the ass.
Quote by Wolfinator-x
I don't know what is going on in this thread or why I have an erection.
#40
Quote by progdude93
I haven't read Descartes since high school, so I can't remember all my issues with it.

But here's one: I think, therefore I am isn't necessarily true. If something thinks, something is. I'll grant you that. But if you're trying to prove anything about existence and identity (and that perception isn't all a lie), you'll have to do much better than that.



My issue with Descartes is that in the first meditation, he states he will completely reverse his opinions, but doesn't even consider the possibility that GOD DOESN"T ****ING EXIST.
banned
Page 1 of 2