Are you real or is it just me?

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Young Philosophers Forum
  3. » Are you real or is it just me?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 03:26 pm
I've been thinking about this for a while, and this came up: Are all of you real, or are you just objects that were created for "my" world. Maybe each of you have "your own" real world. Now just asking you this question completely messes with any bit of truth that this could even have a slight chance of having.
 
richrf
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 04:21 pm
@Zacrates,
Zacrates;96972 wrote:
I've been thinking about this for a while, and this came up: Are all of you real, or are you just objects that were created for "my" world. Maybe each of you have "your own" real world. Now just asking you this question completely messes with any bit of truth that this could even have a slight chance of having.


The best way to test out the theory is to try to take someone's wallet. If there is no reaction, then that person is a figment of your own thoughts. If, however, you get a punch in the face, chances are that there is another being out there. Let me know what happens. Smile

Rich
 
TickTockMan
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 04:30 pm
@richrf,
richrf;96983 wrote:
The best way to test out the theory is to try to take someone's wallet. If there is no reaction, then that person is a figment of your own thoughts. If, however, you get a punch in the face, chances are that there is another being out there. Let me know what happens. Smile

Rich

This analogy doesn't work.
If you are truly creating your own world, it would seem to follow that you've created your own system of cause and effect, laws, rules and regulations as well, so you would therefore imagine someone punching you in the face when you take their wallet, unless you are a very sly pickpocket and they don't notice.
 
Zacrates
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 04:37 pm
@TickTockMan,
TickTockMan;96987 wrote:
This analogy doesn't work.
If you are truly creating your own world, it would seem to follow that you've created your own system of cause and effect, laws, rules and regulations as well, so you would therefore imagine someone punching you in the face when you take their wallet, unless you are a very sly pickpocket and they don't notice.


Exactly, maybe me or someone else who created this world of mine (and yet if this is rue it is so weird to be talking about) has created a set of laws, to not only keep these created objects called other people, but to keep my own morals in line.
 
TickTockMan
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 04:58 pm
@Zacrates,
Zacrates;96991 wrote:
Exactly, maybe me or someone else who created this world of mine (and yet if this is rue it is so weird to be talking about) has created a set of laws, to not only keep these created objects called other people, but to keep my own morals in line.


Two questions:

1) If this is true, why would you or "someone else" do this?

2) If someone else is doing this, who are you?
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 05:10 pm
@TickTockMan,
TickTockMan;96987 wrote:
This analogy doesn't work.
If you are truly creating your own world, it would seem to follow that you've created your own system of cause and effect, laws, rules and regulations as well, so you would therefore imagine someone punching you in the face when you take their wallet, unless you are a very sly pickpocket and they don't notice.


Any supposition, however bizarre and implausible, can be defended if enough other suppositions are made to defend it. But what is that supposed to show about the original supposition? Not that it is not bizarre and is plausible. It shows only that the supposition maker is imaginative. It is like constructing a self-consistent fairy tale. It shows nothing about the truth of the tale.
 
richrf
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 05:11 pm
@TickTockMan,
TickTockMan;96987 wrote:
This analogy doesn't work.
If you are truly creating your own world, it would seem to follow that you've created your own system of cause and effect, laws, rules and regulations as well, so you would therefore imagine someone punching you in the face when you take their wallet, unless you are a very sly pickpocket and they don't notice.


Well, it would be interesting if everyone created a world where if they took money, which they justly felt was their own (because it is one world, so who cares), that the response would be a punch in the nose. While possible, I would go for the alternative which is that there is a separate being attempting to protect his belongings.

Now, you can go the other way. You can walk down some dark alley late at night in some urban area and wait until someone tries to take your money (in Chicago this experiment can be easily performed). When that person asks for the money, you simply say no, and see what your mind can conjure up as the other person's response. These are all interesting experiments to perform.

Rich
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 05:15 pm
@richrf,
richrf;96998 wrote:
Well, it would be interesting if everyone created a world where if they took money, which they justly felt was their own (because it is one world, so who cares), that the response would be a punch in the nose. While possible, I would go for the alternative which is that there is a separate being attempting to protect his belongings. However, both stories are fine.

Rich


Fine. In what way? One of them is "fine" in the way a fairy tale is "fine". Only, there is no reason to believe it is true, and every reason to believe it is false.
 
TickTockMan
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 06:18 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;96997 wrote:
Any supposition, however bizarre and implausible, can be defended if enough other suppositions are made to defend it. But what is that supposed to show about the original supposition? Not that it is not bizarre and is plausible. It shows only that the supposition maker is imaginative. It is like constructing a self-consistent fairy tale. It shows nothing about the truth of the tale.


Does this apply equally to Zacrates' supposition of a solipsistic world as it does to richrfs' suggested method of testing Zacrates' supposition? And, I would suppose, to my response as well?

Also, is this a form of tautology?

kennethamy;96997 wrote:
Any supposition, however bizarre and implausible, can be defended if enough other suppositions are made to defend it.


I may be reading this wrong, but isn't this like saying, "a supposition can be defended if suppositions can defend it"?

Or, does this not matter, as defending something doesn't mean that it is true? Which, I think, is what you are saying anyway.

Or, did I leave something extra on the hat rack in the hall . . . . ?
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 06:32 pm
@TickTockMan,
TickTockMan;97022 wrote:
Does this apply equally to Zacrates' supposition of a solipsistic world as it does to richrfs' suggested method of testing Zacrates' supposition? And, I would suppose, to my response as well?

Also, is this a form of tautology?



I may be reading this wrong, but isn't this like saying, "a supposition can be defended if suppositions can defend it"?

Or, does this not matter, as defending something doesn't mean that it is true?

Or, did I leave something extra on the hat rack in the hall . . . . ?



Well, O. J. Simpson was well defended during his murder trial, and he was acquitted. But I don't think he should have been. Sure, any bizarre and crazy belief can be defended by assuming other bizarre and crazy beliefs, ad hoc as philosophers like to say. That is, "after the fact". How else can a fairy tale be made plausible-sounding to children?
 
Zacrates
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 06:36 pm
@TickTockMan,
TickTockMan;96995 wrote:
Two questions:

1) If this is true, why would you or "someone else" do this?

2) If someone else is doing this, who are you?


Well it was assuming that there was a higher being of some sort, and that he created us, in which case with that involved (not discussing whether it is true or not) that would leave me to believe that this "higher being" put me into this personal world of mine to teach me lessons, and that in fact when i die i go into the full world.

This is just another idea i had branching off of what you said.
 
TickTockMan
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 06:40 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;97026 wrote:
Well, O. J. Simpson was well defended during his murder trial, and he was acquitted. But I don't think he should have been. Sure, any bizarre and crazy belief can be defended by assuming other bizarre and crazy beliefs, ad hoc as philosophers like to say. That is, "after the fact". How else can a fairy tale be made plausible-sounding to children?


Indeed, how else could the homeopathic medicine industry continue to thrive, were it not for bizarre belief piling upon bizarre belief.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 06:43 pm
@TickTockMan,
TickTockMan;97030 wrote:
Indeed, how else could the homeopathic medicine industry continue to thrive, were it not for bizarre belief piling upon bizarre belief.


Beliefs come in clumps. They stand or fall together. Read, The Web of Belief by W.V. Quine, and Joseph Ullian.
 
TickTockMan
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 06:45 pm
@Zacrates,
Zacrates;97028 wrote:
that would leave me to believe that this "higher being" put me into this personal world of mine to teach me lessons, and that in fact when i die i go into the full world.


So who creates the "full world"?

And how do you see it as being different from the world you think you might be in now?
 
Zacrates
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 06:53 pm
@TickTockMan,
TickTockMan;97033 wrote:
So who creates the "full world"?

And how do you see it as being different from the world you think you might be in now?


Well the "full world" would be where the real everyone is..... and as to the creator, well that is a question that would be in the is there a god who or what is he blah blah blah subject
 
TickTockMan
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 06:54 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;97032 wrote:
Beliefs come in clumps. They stand or fall together. Read, The Web of Belief by W.V. Quine, and Joseph Ullian.


Thanks. I'll see if I can get our local bookstore to order this, as unfortunately they only have about six philosophy titles in stock, and they all seem to be variations of the Philosophy and the Simpsons and Philosophy and Buffy the Vampire Slayer variety.

If not, I'll put it on my Amazon Wish List.

---------- Post added 10-12-2009 at 07:08 PM ----------

Zacrates;97036 wrote:
Well the "full world" would be where the real everyone is..... and as to the creator, well that is a question that would be in the is there a god who or what is he blah blah blah subject


But how would you define the "real everyone"?

This sounds a bit like imagining that you are being denied admittance to some sort of exclusive party or club.

I like to imagine all sorts of odd things, but I generally try to avoid pretending that I'm being excluded from some other sort of fantasy.
 
Zacrates
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 07:13 pm
@TickTockMan,
TickTockMan;97037 wrote:
Thanks. I'll see if I can get our local bookstore to order this, as unfortunately they only have about six philosophy titles in stock, and they all seem to be variations of the Philosophy and the Simpsons and Philosophy and Buffy the Vampire Slayer variety.

If not, I'll put it on my Amazon Wish List.

---------- Post added 10-12-2009 at 07:08 PM ----------



But how would you define the "real everyone"?

This sounds a bit like imagining that you are being denied admittance to some sort of exclusive party or club.

I like to imagine all sorts of odd things, but I generally try to avoid pretending that I'm being excluded from some other sort of fantasy.


Here is a review of what i am thinking:

I have my own world full of fake people

The real versions of these other people have their own worlds just like me

When we die in our personal worlds we are sent to the literal world where there are no fake people, only the other "real people" who have died in their personal worlds.
 
Leonard
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 08:18 pm
@Zacrates,
This somewhat alludes to the idea that I become a different person depending on the decisions I make. Each time I decide something, whether it be to go down this path and not the other or even moving my hand slightly. Each decision results in a 'quantum' paradigm shift unique from any other possible decision.
 
Absolution phil
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 09:13 pm
@Zacrates,
I know Descartes and Hume really wondered if they could justify anything outside of themselves. There is that whole brain in a vat kind of thought experiment. I have always wondered what fully functioning brain would observe if completely removed from all senses. There is evidence of sensation of phantom limbs and of the physical effect of dreaming. One could imagine a brain could generate its own reality and its own rules, if not already doing so.
 
TickTockMan
 
Reply Mon 12 Oct, 2009 11:47 pm
@Zacrates,
I have a variety of questions for you.

Zacrates;97040 wrote:
Here is a review of what i am thinking:

I have my own world full of fake people


If that is true, then I must be one of your 'fake people'. If this is so, what is my purpose in communicating with you? I feel that I have all the features and faculties one associates with a 'real person', so how can you (or I, for that matter) tell that I am actually a 'fake person'?

Zacrates;97040 wrote:
The real versions of these other people have their own worlds just like me


Which I would think means that they must also have a 'fake' version of you. Are you okay with that idea? That there are potentially 6.8 billion or so fake versions of you?

How do you know you are not a 'fake person' in my 'personal world'? In which case, what am I doing right now? Posting to myself?

Zacrates;97040 wrote:
When we die in our personal worlds we are sent to the literal world where there are no fake people, only the other 'real people' who have died in their personal worlds.


Do people who have been sent to the 'literal world' know that they once existed in a 'personal world' full of 'fake people'? If not, what is the point of the change of cast and scenery? Do you imagine that you will be treated differently when you are in the company of 'real people'? Will you treat them differently?
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Young Philosophers Forum
  3. » Are you real or is it just me?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 09/17/2021 at 12:32:30