On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:55 +0100, "Bob W" <[email protected]> wrote:
> His philosophy tutor should smack his knuckles with a ruler. He claims > that > we have no proof of our existence*, therefore we do not exist. However, > his > argument doesn't support any particular conclusion. At best you might say > 'we have no proof of our existence, therefore it is possible that we do > not > exist'. > > Descartes went through a similar crisis and concluded 'cogito ergo sum', > but > even then he should only really conclude 'I think therefore thoughts > exist'. > > If thoughts can exist without a thinker, then we ourselves are merely > thoughts, and therefore we exist. But if we are merely thoughts, why do > we > fart and belch and shit? > > Go back to that wall, and write all this underneath. > I would. But I don't exist. So I can't. Cheers Brian ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ > > G'day all > > > > A bit of urban philosophy on a grotty and grimy wall - Hunter St, > Newcastle. > > > > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1370864/PESO/slides/IMGP8892peso.html > > > > > > (*istDS with 16-45 mm DA zoom.) > > > > > > The image is a bit small to read the text so, for those into > existentialism, here > > it is: > > > > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1370864/IMGP8892part.jpg > -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - The professional email service -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
