Becoming the Right Person vs. Doing Right for Right Reasons

[seer]

No, you don't have to take reality by faith seer. Whatever goes on in our minds is the reality, whether or not there is an external reality which corresponds with our minds. There are only 2 possible worlds, one in which there is no external reality, and one in which there is an external reality, but, as I explained previously no matter which of those two possible worlds is the real world, we can know that what goes on in our minds corresponds with reality. In the former case, there is no external reality, therefore whatever goes on in our minds is all there is, that is the reality. And in the latter case, there being an external reality, if our minds didn't correspond with it, then its existence would be superfluous.

Jim yes you do take it by faith. If you believe that what goes on in your mind corresponds to reality (which I'm sure you do) that is an assumption that can not be logically proven.

[JimL]

Jim yes you do take it by faith. If you believe that what goes on in your mind corresponds to reality (which I'm sure you do) that is an assumption that can not be logically proven.

I just explained to you why that isn't true. Take my argument apart and explain to me in what sense it is wrong. Simply saying that I'm wrong, and asserting the validity of your statement over and over again isn't an argument! Take my argument apart please.

[seer]

I just explained to you why that isn't true. Take my argument apart and explain to me in what sense it is wrong. Simply saying that I'm wrong, and asserting the validity of your statement over and over again isn't an argument! Take my argument apart please.

Jim, do you believe that what goes on in your mind corresponds to reality - yes or no? If yes can you prove that deductively? That is the only question in front of us.

[JimL]

Jim, do you believe that what goes on in your mind corresponds to reality - yes or no? If yes can you prove that deductively? That is the only question in front of us.

Please explain how my argument is false seer. I gave you my argument already, if you think it wrong, take it apart and explain how it is wrong. All you are doing is making an assertion. So, please explain to me in what sense my argument is wrong!

[seer]

Please explain how my argument is false seer. I gave you my argument already, if you think it wrong, take it apart and explain how it is wrong. All you are doing is making an assertion. So, please explain to me in what sense my argument is wrong!

Jim you said:

Whatever goes on in our minds is the reality, whether or not there is an external reality which corresponds with our minds.

Ok, for now.

There are only 2 possible worlds, one in which there is no external reality, and one in which there is an external reality, but, as I explained previously no matter which of those two possible worlds is the real world, we can know that what goes on in our minds corresponds with reality. In the former case, there is no external reality, therefore whatever goes on in our minds is all there is, that is the reality. And in the latter case, there being an external reality, if our minds didn't correspond with it, then its existence would be superfluous.

No it is not superfluous, it would mean that what we believe is reality is actually a deception.

[JimL]

Jim you said:



Ok, for now.




No it is not superfluous, it would mean that what we believe is reality is actually a deception.

Seer what sense would the existence of an external world make if our minds didn't correspond to it? That would be two separate realities, two separate worlds. If our minds didn't correspond to that world, it could only be because it is not our world, it would be a distinct reality.

[seer]

Seer what sense would the existence of an external world make if our minds didn't correspond to it? That would be two separate realities, two separate worlds. If our minds didn't correspond to that world, it could only be because it is not our world, it would be a distinct reality.

No Jim, it would mean that the thoughts in your head were false as far as representing reality. It would be akin to your dreams, the dreams seem real to you, at the time, but they do not reflect what is actually happening.

[JimL]

No Jim, it would mean that the thoughts in your head were false as far as representing reality. It would be akin to your dreams, the dreams seem real to you, at the time, but they do not reflect what is actually happening.

Seer that doesn't make sense, if the thoughts in our heads, if our experience of the world, doesn't correspond with an existing external reality, then why would there be an existing external reality? Why even assume the existence of an external reality if the only reality that we all experience is only internal, is only in our minds. You tell me, why as a part of our world, would there be an existing external reality if that reality has nothing to do with the reality of our experience?

[Tassman]

No Jim, it would mean that the thoughts in your head were false as far as representing reality. It would be akin to your dreams, the dreams seem real to you, at the time, but they do not reflect what is actually happening.

If the "thoughts in your head" about the nature of reality were significantly at variance to everyone else's, one would be deemed eccentric, delusional or mentally ill.

[Tassman]

Tass where did I ever say that I have a deductive argument for God, please reference that claim by me. The only deductive argument I referenced was Kant's - whose premises can be disputed. I think they are solid, you don't.

It is an assumption based on limited knowledge, you can not prove that ethics are merely the result of evolutionary pressures, and you never will.

First we know that totalitarianism does work, the Roman Empire lasted centuries, as did other Empires, and is working in China, Iran, North Korea and Cuba today.

Never mind the fact that it works quite well in higher primate groups like we have discussed. And economic egalitarianism ends up looking very much like socialism. And like I said risk takers like Trump, Gates, Buffett, Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, etc... create thousands and thousands of jobs doing more to financially help people lift themselves up than all your welfare programs combined.

Nevertheless, the statistics reveal that the more egalitarian countries have a higher average living standard than the violent, inequitable USA despite the good guys, countering the rampant, greedy capitalism of Trump etc

[seer]

Seer that doesn't make sense, if the thoughts in our heads, if our experience of the world, doesn't correspond with an existing external reality, then why would there be an existing external reality? Why even assume the existence of an external reality if the only reality that we all experience is only internal, is only in our minds. You tell me, why as a part of our world, would there be an existing external reality if that reality has nothing to do with the reality of our experience?

Jim, again look at the Matrix model (there is an external reality, with a purpose, we just don't know what it is), but that is not the point, which is, we can not prove with deductive reasoning that what goes on in our heads actually corresponds to reality.

[seer]

You have it exactly backwards. Kant moves from morality to God, the idea is that if morality is rational the good need to be rewarded and the wicked punished. Of course in this life it is often the opposite, hence we need God to balance the scales of justice. And if that is not the case morality is irrational - it would be irrational not to take advantage if it serves your purpose.



What ethics? War, rape, murder, selfishness, greed, lust, etc...

No totalitarianism works, Communism as a economic system fails, that is why China is moving to capitalism.

Nevertheless, the statistics reveal that the more egalitarian countries have a higher average living standard than the violent, inequitable USA despite the good guys, countering the rampant, greedy capitalism of Trump etc

But your egalitarian countries are facing more and more budget problems, here in the US we have a 20 trillion dollar debt going forward (the largest portion going to social programs). This kind of spending is not sustainable, look at the growing debt in your country: http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/

"socialism is great until you run out of other peoples money."

[JimL]

Jim, again look at the Matrix model (there is an external reality, with a purpose, we just don't know what it is), but that is not the point, which is, we can not prove with deductive reasoning that what goes on in our heads actually corresponds to reality.

We are not talking about the delusional experience of one individual, we are talking about the nature of reality itself. Yes, we can isolate an individual, put them into a pod say, change their experience, but it would make no sense for a world to exist in which there were two completely distinct realities, one that is experienced by all, and another that is experienced by no one. Thats why we can know, if there is an external reality, that our minds correspond with it, and that if there is no external reality, then the question itself is pointless.

[seer]

We are not talking about the delusional experience of one individual, we are talking about the nature of reality itself. Yes, we can isolate an individual, put them into a pod say, change their experience, but it would make no sense for a world to exist in which there were two completely distinct realities, one that is experienced by all, and another that is experienced by no one. Thats why we can know, if there is an external reality, that our minds correspond with it, and that if there is no external reality, then the question itself is pointless.

Right Jim, it could be one individual or all of mankind under the control of an Alien race. It makes no difference to the problem of deductively justifying our experience.

[Charles]

Right Jim, it could be one individual or all of mankind under the control of an Alien race. It makes no difference to the problem of deductively justifying our experience.

Seer has asked a couple of times whether anyone could prove deductively that what goes on in their mind corresponds to reality. He even asked me once for a yes or no answer. I refused to give a yes or no answer because I found the question was based on a misunderstanding and - once again - found that his question for a proof was a simplification of a rather complex matter. Let me explain to further detail why I think so.

What is reality?The real consequencesEither skip it or hold on to a something we cannot ever knowAn ever moving target