There is no "self"
Debate Rounds (3)
Example: I do not have to see a tree for it to exist; it exists without my perception of it, the tree's existence does not depend on my observation of it.
Likewise, everything you believe about yourself does not and cannot exist as an objective "truth"
Others believe that life is a fabrication, an imagined world, that reality does not exist, that the substance of life is within the story, the mind, that which man creates for himself.
Or you may want to argue over the necessary existence of the ego or self. Can go in a number of directions.
I believe I have fingers.. I actually believe I'm using them to type right now. I believe I'm white, and this can be proven true by more than just the obvious color of my skin, but by tracing my lineage.
If the self is not real, and I'm the only person in a room, is the room empty?
I believe I control my actions and contain energy. If I spin a wheel hooked up to a machine that captures energy, is that energy not real? If I shocked you with that electricity, would that be reality?
How can my perception of you getting shocked off energy I created (directed through food I ate) possibly not be real?
And again by self I mean ego, not our physical bodies; those are real. We are made of physical matter that is a real substance. However, nothing can be contributed to a given object or person by perception. So you sitting in a room is actually just part of one united "existence" that all things inside and outside of it partake in, again independent of your observation.
If you shocked me with energy, that which is me would be shocked. I think your understanding of self differed from mine.
You may wish to argue on the point that our beliefs are insignificant. Because what is your life if your beliefs about yourself are nothing?
I can't see cold air, but its real.
My brainwaves can be scanned. If I'm brain dead my ego is gone, there will be no brainwaves. But when my ego is evaluating itself, brainwaves can be detected.
My perception of myself is mine, its opinion.
There is self. As I speak to myself in my mind energy is coursing through my brain.. Its real.
My argument: your perception of yourself exists only in your perception. There is nothing objective about that perception. All of the thoughts you think compose a self that only exists by your conviction that it exists, yours and mine.
This is unlike a couch, as someone argued in the comment section. You think my argument is "The couch I am sitting on is not a couch because I can only use the resource of my mind to understand it as such," but no, that is not my argument. There is a couch indeed. The couch exists. People exist. I exist. It's just that my perceptions don't. The couch is not a perception, the couch is a reality because it exists independent of whether I observe it or not. The self, however, to restate, only exists in my conviction of it. The self- not the person, which does exist.
I argue that "I think, therefore I am" is misleading. Rather, it is, "I am, and I also think that I am." Your existence is self evident: the fact that you exist needs no proof. Whether or not you THINK you exist, you exist. If you said, "I don't think I am, and therefore I am not," you would be wrong. Your thoughts do not confirm your existence, neither do they confirm the truth. Even if you didn't know that you existed, you'd exist.
The truth is that which is permanent. You are right to say that when you die, your ego dies. That's exactly why it is not a truth. If your thoughts are impermanent and your "self" or "ego" is only existing based on its perception of itself, does it really exist?
The energy that is produced by thoughts, the brainwaves as you stated, is real, however. But how we associate ourselves with those thoughts and whether or not we believe them is where these thoughts are put on trial. The ego evaluates thought. But take away that which evaluates the thought and what you have is emptiness. You're left only with the very nature of your being, thoughts without opinion.
Thought is not emptiness. Thought with association is emptiness. Thoughts can be of the truth. The thought that "I exist" is true. This is not because I "believe" it, but just because it's true. I don't have to think anything of it. Any thought that the ego creates a relationship to is not real. But thought is real in itself.
My final proposition: What are we when we are that which does not observe itself? My answer: Egoless.
BillionBrainCells forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Pro. Con forfeited the final round which is rarely acceptable behavior in any debate setting. For this, Pro is awarded conduct. S&G - Tie. Both had minor flaws in spelling and grammar, thus this balances out. Arguments - Pro. I feel like both never really met on common ground. One of arguing mainly for perception being the end all, while the other was trying to prove empirically that there is a self. Hence the conflict between the two. Ultimately, Pro presented rebuttals and arguments that went unchallenged due to Con's forfeit. For Pro's arguments remaining standing, I award him argument points. Source - Tie. Neither utilized sources in 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.