The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

The concept of existence doesn't exist beyond the human mind

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/17/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 505 times Debate No: 65312
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)




I will explain all my arguments next round, at the moment I have 4 more mintues of energy on my iPad.


The flaw in that statement is the use of the modifier 'human'.

If we can rely on the logic of the Drake equation, it seems inescapable that other sentient life exists somewhere in the cosmos.

Nonhuman sentient beings are almost sure to grasp the concept of their own existence.

Therefore, the thesis is not proved.
Debate Round No. 1


But how are we to know that animals and other beings but the individual perceiving the existence of beings really exist? Maybe I imagined that you exist, that this site exists, that other humans exist, that the color red exists, and so on. Maybe the Moon doesn't exist beyond my head. What exists anyways? How do you define existence? I think of things as in a sphere. There's an infinite number of view points and very few, if any are wrong. It's all about the very shaky way in which we define existence, because we have nothing but our mind to define it.


"But how are we to know that animals and other beings but the individual perceiving the existence of beings really exist?"

That has zero semantic content, or at least if it does have meaning it's so far beyond me that I should probably concede forthwith...
But perhaps it is just the fact that it's grammatically so terribly defective.

Your imagination is not the subject, And the rest is a discussion of perception vs objective reality.

Please refer to the topic before you reply, and try to stay within sight of it as you compose.
Debate Round No. 2


Frist, I'm not a native English speaker, don't expect my grammar to be perfect. Second, the statment did work. How do you know animals exist and you didn't imagine them. Third, I explained my sphere view because I wanted you to see my point. And the forth thing you said, I didn't get it. Those were my points just up in that argument, look at it and you'll get it, as for me, when relating to my points please quote me or make it clearer to what point you're reffering to.


It is a practical certainty that intelligent alien life exists or has existed.

To think is to be aware of ones own existence.

Non-human minds can be aware of their own existence.

And on a parallel track...

"According to the prevailing science, individuals of most species can"t recognize their reflections as themselves. The only known exceptions are humans, some great apes, and possibly dolphins, elephants, and magpies"all animals with high intelligence.
In chimpanzees, perhaps a few other primates, killer whales, and bottle nose dolphins, changing the image in the mirror causes the animal to behave in a way that suggests self-recognition. In chimpanzees, marking the chimp with a spot of paint or dye will cause the chimp to, when viewing the image, touch the marked spot. This suggests that the chimp sees the image in the mirror as itself, and that it can recognize the change in itself by exploring that change. Marine mammals, of course, lack appendages for self-exploration, but at least a few marine mammals show behavioral responses to changed mirror images that suggest self-recognition."

An animal can recognize it's own existence, therefore it must be able to hold the concept of existence.
Debate Round No. 3


Philana1 forfeited this round.


I take your lack of response as capitulation, or at least that you find reason to agree with my arguments.
Debate Round No. 4


Philana1 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
Existence exists is an axiom which states that there is something, as opposed to nothing. At the core of every thought is the observation that "I am aware of something". The very fact that one is aware of something is the proof that something in some form exists -- that existence exists -- existence being all that which exists. Also, to grasp the thought, "I am aware of something," you must be conscious. Existence is axiomatic because it is necessary for all knowledge and it cannot be denied without conceding its truth. To deny existence is to say that something doesn't exist. A denial of something is only possible if existence exists.
Posted by FinickyRealist 2 years ago
You need to refine your argument to either, do things exists outside of the mind or, does the mind create existence, a concept is just an abstract idea represented in our minds symbolically and perceptually through our senses.
Posted by cibro 2 years ago
Con is unarguable, because a concept is always a thing of the mind.
Posted by Pfalcon1318 2 years ago
Define "concept", "existence" and "the human mind", and I might take this.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
concepts are of the mind, not real
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture