It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

prove that you exist

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Thekherham
 


Prove it. Right here, right now.
Without any sort of loophole we could use to refute you.




posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 


Refute that I exist. Since you cannot disprove that I exist, and scientifically, we cannot prove anything in every single circumstance. This text on the web that is allegedly from DINSTAAR with a bit of research is sufficient evidence that DINSTAAR exists, due to the fact that you can't disprove this fact. From what you know now, I could be an automated response, a person on the net, or a figment of your imagination.

If further evidence were to be scientifically collected to verify my existence, one would find an IP address and an email address. Also, there are certain things that computers are incapable of doing in their present state, like discern or summarize. In further research one would find that I exhibit strong evidence for being a separate human being. Also, the idea of me being imaginary or just a part of your own being is without any evidence. It is pure conjecture, and is void of logical reasoning to why.


The bun is in your mind.....



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 


All great evidence that you exist... now... prove that you exist!

I admit I can't prove that you don't exist. I think the point of this thread is to show that proof is an elusive thing, and that if you open your mind to *ALL* possibilities, then nothing can be proven one way or another.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 03:25 AM
link   
my heart.
it beats irregularly.
due to the mechanics of a heart murmur and palpitations.
perhaps brought on from the paxil antidepressant i took in my teens.
but OP.
prove to me, that you exist. please.
because i am the only one in my life that see's through my eyes.
and when i get bad anxiety attacks, and i am on the verge of thinking i am dying or my palpitations get real bad, all i can see and feel is the feeling of dizziness, tingling and shock the my heart beats in my chest. i will be the only person in my own life to feel my self die. be it there a heaven or just a blackness at the end. or perhaps a hell or purgatory it cocytus or styx, i will be the only one to experience that. and it is a scary thing indeed.
the only thing i do these days is have a cigarette every now and then when i drink, or eat fast food, or enjoy my life as much as possible till my first child is born and just wait the new 2 months - 40 years till my life is over.
only i will be the one to experience that. and i have no idea how that will go down.
so OP. prove to me that you exist. and that my own mind didnt create this possibility through the art of living, or a manifest in such a way that castaneda has written of.
none of you exist fully to me, and i am either in a nightmare, heaven or a simulation.

-sky breaker

[edit on 10-4-2008 by SkyBreaker]



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 06:24 AM
link   
I can prove I exist. Are you ready for my scenario/proof?reply to post by drock905
 



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 


hEh.

There is still a loophole and by no means am I saying you don't in fact exist.

Perhaps I am just a mad god in a void that is dreaming all of you up since after all I KNOW I exist.
Well you can say the same thing of course since my words are not well from you.
Damn I think I need to go back to bed cause my brain is refusing to work right atm.


reply to post by mattifikation
 


And yea what this guy said.


[edit on 10-4-2008 by WraothAscendant]



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 


All great evidence that you exist... now... prove that you exist!

I admit I can't prove that you don't exist. I think the point of this thread is to show that proof is an elusive thing, and that if you open your mind to *ALL* possibilities, then nothing can be proven one way or another.


That is the point of the thread, but that is a moot point. Because we cannot prove anything we must rely on evidence logic and reasoning to reach an intelligent conclusion. That is my point. It is unwise to believe in some unfounded notion that contradicts evidence.

Using that there is no basis for scientific proof in any argument is just a pathetic attempt to say that any evidence is meaningless.

Try to prove the theory of gravity. You can't, but you cannot provide any evidence that it is invalid. In fact, all the evidence related to gravity holds that the theory is true, because if there were only one exception, the theory would be bunk.

Also, saying you do not believe in gravity, because there is no proof, is not a reasonable belief. You are bound by gravity as you state that you do not believe in it.

And eventually, the debate will get outside the realm of scientific evidence, which then turns into a philosophical debate.
You can say that you are just imagining all of this and this is all an elaborate dream that you created. Evidence cannot be given either way, but I may ask, what is the point(or any number of philosophical arguments against this idea)?

I understand the point of this thread, but my point is that the lack of scientific proof is a illogical argument against evidence.

You can keep saying things like "but prove that you exist", but that doesn't negate logic nor does it provide a reasonable conclusion that no one exists.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 


Yes but there are theories that state why gravity works and all of them have a hard time proving it.
You can't disprove gravity that is very true.

And I see an obvious fallacy when anyone says "This is true and this is the only way it can be." because there is ALWAYS another explanation out there that could be possible. For every argument there is a counter argument.

But it seems to me you are putting words in his mouth since when did he say the things you allege he did?

Erm I hope I stated that well enough.




[edit on 10-4-2008 by WraothAscendant]



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 


I'm realizing more and more that we aren't really arguing here about anything, we're just stating two non-mutually exclusive facts back and forth.

I agree completely that we shouldn't stop believing in other people or stop considering all evidence based on the remote chance that nobody exists but me, (or you, from your point of view, or somebody else from their point of view.)

I also agree that this is a purely philosophical discussion and not a scientific one.

I don't agree that the point is moot though - not entirely. For most debates, yes, but for some of the absolutely silly debates that show up around here it could be applicable. For example, I suggest that when people post their redundant "absolute proof of God!" or "absolute proof that God doesn't exist" threads, we point them to this thread just for... ah, shigs and gittles...



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 



I don't agree that the point is moot though - not entirely. For most debates, yes, but for some of the absolutely silly debates that show up around here it could be applicable. For example, I suggest that when people post their redundant "absolute proof of God!" or "absolute proof that God doesn't exist" threads, we point them to this thread just for... ah, shigs and gittles...


How about every thread pointed to this one? (*Language*)



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 




I don't agree that the point is moot though - not entirely. For most debates, yes, but for some of the absolutely silly debates that show up around here it could be applicable. For example, I suggest that when people post their redundant "absolute proof of God!" or "absolute proof that God doesn't exist" threads, we point them to this thread just for... ah, shigs and gittles...


I see your point, but those absolutely silly debate (which in turn yield the highest posts... hmmm) I generally do not consider real debates. I was omitting these in my post.

What I was after was using the idea of no scientific proof as a defense in a debate against mounting evidence. Many times when I engage in a debate with someone who is trying to disprove what I think, it ends up with them using this as a last ditch effort to make the evidence meaningless. I have seen it on ATS in the religion forum(don't go there... there's a bunch of UXO's and IED's strewn all over... it's not a cheerful place).

As for making this a sticky or something.... I say no. I think it should be compressed and put into a general statement about scientific debate, and philosophical ideas. One thread for all.
... but then we would get in a debate over the nature of knowledge itself. Epistemological discussions are fun(-ish).



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Here is the proof you ask for.

One of these conditions is true:
(A) I exist.
(B) I do not exist.

Statement 1: If (A) is true, then (B) must be false.
Statement 2: If (B) is true, then (A) must be false.

Conversely:
Statement 3: If (A) is false, then (B) must be true.
Statement 4: If (B) is false, then (A) must be true.

Consider any evidence for my existence (A) or non-existence (B):

Is there any evidence of condition (B)? – No.

Therefore, Statement 4 applies and condition (A) is true - I exist.





[edit on 11/4/08 by Myrdyn]



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   
I can certainly prove that I exist. I exist! I said it, and I mean it.

Do I care if you believe me? No!

All that exists is the self. I am aware of my self, therefore I am.

Prove it to you?!

Not even going to bother. All you are is a whisper in my ear.



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Myrdyn
 


That's not proof. That's evidence. Evidence of something is not proof of it, unless there's no other explanation for that evidence. Sorry, keep trying!



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Sociologist Emile Durkheim once said, essentially, that it doesn't really matter if something is real of not if the thing is real in its consequences. I suppose you could apply that to an individual, just as easily as you could to some other thing that's existence is in question. God, for instance. It doesn't really matter if God exists to the burning witch. They're still burning.

And in the same way, it doesn't really matter if I can prove I exist or not. As long as you're reading these words, and they create an effect, like your eyes moving back and forth, it's a consequence, and that's the only thing that matters. I'm real enough to generate consequences.




posted on Apr, 12 2008 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Even if we don't exist in the way we perceive ourselves doesn't mean we don't exist. Our energy is felt in a heartbeat and the sound of our energy echoes through our perceived time. Our energy is touched by other energy's in the form of love, hate and dominance. We've scared the earth with our energy in search of more energy. The earth feels our presence and all that dwells on this planet knows we're here. And to know that I exist is knowing that I don't want to non-exist. I also believe that if we can agree and disagree on the same subject then we both exist somehow? You asking me this question makes me wonder why you asked? Did I exist before the question or after?

[edit on 4/12/2008 by Solarskye]



posted on Apr, 12 2008 @ 02:03 AM
link   
Pablo, who read English for the first time laughed at these last replies.

Try saying that to a deaf person, they will laugh.

[edit on 12-4-2008 by jwater88]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 05:18 PM
link   
So I think and so I exist! Am I this physical body or just a hologram? Matters not cause as far as it might be concerned, I am nothing more than a thinking energy molecule and all that you might consider as existance is nothing but a thought and possibly even a group thought at that. So bottom line is, I exist cause I have now responded to your post.




posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   
You must mean a consciousness other than what you would call 'I' (I will call this 'you') . 'you' (me) exists since 'you' (me) is a consciousness other than 'I' : even if 'you' is an aspect of 'I's' subconscious, or whatever.

Speaking from my perspective :


If you are 'you' then I am proof that an 'I' - an alternate consciousness - exists (whatever the nature of this consciousness is) : since 'you', qua consciousness, did not write this message.


[edit on 14-4-2008 by granny smith]



posted on Apr, 18 2008 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
reply to post by Myrdyn
 


That's not proof. That's evidence. Evidence of something is not proof of it, unless there's no other explanation for that evidence. Sorry, keep trying!


Definition of Proof:
1. Any factual evidence that helps to establish the truth of something.
2. A formal series of statements showing that if one thing is true, something else necessarily follows from it.

Your apology is accepted.

Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant.



[edit on 18/4/08 by Myrdyn]




top topics



 
4
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join