Prove your existence!
Debate Rounds (3)
Further increasing the odds that you do not exist is the coincidence that started this debate. Within five minutes of me posting the challenge, you accepted it, and you were one of only two sides in the debate that made me want to start this one, with you and LaughItUpLydia**. On a website with at least hundreds and probably thousands of people, it just happened to be you, and that quickly. That is the sort of coincidence that often happens in works of fiction, which my brain knows about, and is quite likely to pull into the dream if life is a dream. I realize that I did comment on that debate, and that you may have searched for a similar debate to the one you were in before (all if you really exist of course), but the odds against that are still truly tremendous.
to me its not so much about, do i know what another really thinks or something, because i simply can not be certain of that by default.. the known about another person is the light emitted through the understanding of his/hers being
without belief you cease to exist, as i can only know myself
You make an interesting point about the light emitted through the understanding of one's being. A computer or dream cannot make some things completely believable, such as a person or music. But we have no proof that anything that we see in this, for lack of a better word, "existence", is how things really work in the real, physical world if this is not it. Physicality may not even exist, but that is beside the point, I mean the world that is created without humans or whatever the sentient race is. This must exist, because even if there is only one truly existing person then we are either in that reality or that reality exists, because there cannot be existence without reality by definition. And since this debate exists at least in a manner in which it can be experienced, either you, someone who is reading it, or I must exist. I say that it exists because if none of us existed, then that could not exist, and if someone here does exist, then it has been proved that this debate exists.
Now that the existence of some sort of advanced life has been proven, I can get back to my original point. The hypothetical machines that create our lives may have been programmed to make the machines in the illusion unable to perfectly simulate a person or music to take away suspicion that life is just a machine. If all computers that one experienced were unable to replicate any emotion or person, then it would reduce suspicion that all of life was a computer, to put it differently.
That may seem to affirm that either your light of the understanding of a person argument was true or that you are a computer program, but if all of life was a computer program then you would be such a minuscule part of it, just a few words on a screen for me or one of seven billion people, billions of animals, trillions of insects, and millions of light-years of space, that it would hardly be fair to say that you exist.
This life could also be a dream, in which the brain knows the light of understanding of people who the person has met in real life, so it can replicate it perfectly.
As for your last argument, as you can only know yourself, I can only know myself. That has only proven your existence to yourself, if you exist, no one else can know you exist just because you can know your own existence, they cannot read your mind.
Belief has nothing to do with reality, I could believe that I am John A. Macdonald, that does not mean that I am him or that I was the first prime minister of Canada. Similarly, I could believe that there is no such thing as air, and air would continue to exist. If belief does create reality, then how could the Greek gods not be real, and instead science and/or modern religions are true (I personally believe both, but that's not the topic of this debate)? Nobody looked into the sky and believed that we were a small dot in a massive world with over a hundred different elements making it up and millions of giant flaming balls of gas and plasma were in the sky, people looked into the sky, and after seeing that there were flaming balls, believing that we were on a planet like we are. Most of the time the seeing comes before anyone believes that something is true.
If existence did stream from the belief of one or more people, which I have proven according to history which may not have truly happened is not true, then indeed all of us would exist, but you have yet to make a valid point that that would be true, or that in any other way existence ceases without belief.
Thanks for accepting this debate! I should have made it have more rounds, sorry about that. If you want we could do this again with more rounds, I would be on either side, proving or disproving provability. I think that this is an interesting topic for debate that could be done multiple times with more depth explored each time.
i am light on your screen and a story in your mind
life is true for experience to exist.. everything that exist has an opposite for it to exist
why do we have different words if they all mean black? a stone is a stone, how do you know what i am talking about if the word stone simply means black?
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.