Perhaps it is time to start one DWB....by the way, I agree with your rhetorical question. Our awareness itself is the only ultimate arbiter here.
On Aug 18, 12:05 pm, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote: > "Isn't proof of existence outside the confines of ones own > consciousness of more value?" > Sometimes I wonder! I think this seemingly simple question could have > an entire thread of it's own. Is not consciousness alone all the proof > one needs? > > On Aug 18, 11:32 am, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > "... On Aug 18, 5:40 am, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> > > wrote: ..." > > > > I think the quote you may be reffering to was that made by Descartes > > > which was"Je pense donce je suis" or "cogito ergo sum" in english "I > > > think, therefore I am" > > > Which is a valid statement and along the same philosophical lines. > > > Is it really a valid statement? I know philosophically it is a time- > > honored phrase going all the way back to the Greek "knowledge is > > knowledge" by Plato and further expanded by Aristotle. But it reeks > > of a circular argument to me. I think therefore I am. I am therefore > > I think. It really seems to go nowhere. There must be better proofs > > that one exists than I am. If it works at all, it only works within > > the confines of one's own consciousness -- which may be all one needs > > for proving one's own existence to oneself. However, that is also a > > circular exercise that can only lead one back to oneself. > > > Isn't proof of existence outside the confines of ones own > > consciousness of more value? > > > > Thought is a powerful tool and when coupled with belief it > > > is a creative force. > > > You'll get no argument from me on that statement. However, for that > > creative force to be useful and relevant, it seems that it must > > include others as well. Of what good is thought and creativity if it > > is not shared with others? If a person is monastic in the extreme -- > > a hermit with no contact whatsoever with anyone else -- of what good, > > what use, what value, is that person's thoughts and creativity? > > > > I see the reasoning behind the assertion of the > > > intelligent design of the universe when looking at things through these > > > glasses however rose colored they may be. > > > Exactly. There is no evidence of intelligent design in the universe. > > As far as science has been able to discern the universe is pure > > evolution from the most primitive form of life to the most complex. > > There is ample physical reason throughout evolution to conclude that > > it did not need intelligence to begin nor to continue. There is no > > more intelligent design to life than there is to gravity (the obvious > > pun notwithstanding.)
