Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

So pattern of sth proves existence of sth..?!

Jack_Dead
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2016 5:05:39 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
Well, In my recent debates, opinions and even discussions with friends, I am astonished that this "pattern of sth proves existence of sth?" dilemma is everywhere.

A) Example (whether I think = I am ?)
1) Thinking is electrical impulse Patterns
2) Patterns represents existence of a subject (even if your brain is controlled by machine, machine still made those patterns)
3) Subject represents self

4) So Self(pattern) must exists. (I think therefore I am)

Yep, I believe you will found out that actually Point (3) is highly debatable - But that is off topic. For now, lets consider whether "pattern of sth proves existence of sth?"

B) More examples for you: (Humans discovered Maths not created Maths)
1) Mathematical patterns exist before Humans do
2) Patterns of Maths proves the existence of Maths

3) Hence when humans used our own way to represent maths (e.g. equations,numbers...)
4) We are simply discovering an existing Maths
(So it is only a discovery, not creation)
(since creation is Not exists to existing, while discover is existing to existing)

Whoa now! The above all may seem to be Really confusing, and I apologize for not being able to simplify it.
But Notice that those two Big debate topics (I think = I am/ Discovery VS Creating/and many more)
All depends on ONE crucial preliminary - "pattern of sth proves existence of sth"

So yep! does pattern of sth proves existence of sth ? Time to blew our minds :P
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2016 6:52:04 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/23/2016 5:05:39 AM, Jack_Dead wrote:
Well, In my recent debates, opinions and even discussions with friends, I am astonished that this "pattern of sth proves existence of sth?" dilemma is everywhere.

A) Example (whether I think = I am ?)
1) Thinking is electrical impulse Patterns
2) Patterns represents existence of a subject (even if your brain is controlled by machine, machine still made those patterns)
3) Subject represents self

4) So Self(pattern) must exists. (I think therefore I am)

Yep, I believe you will found out that actually Point (3) is highly debatable - But that is off topic. For now, lets consider whether "pattern of sth proves existence of sth?"

B) More examples for you: (Humans discovered Maths not created Maths)
1) Mathematical patterns exist before Humans do
2) Patterns of Maths proves the existence of Maths

3) Hence when humans used our own way to represent maths (e.g. equations,numbers...)
4) We are simply discovering an existing Maths
(So it is only a discovery, not creation)
(since creation is Not exists to existing, while discover is existing to existing)

Whoa now! The above all may seem to be Really confusing, and I apologize for not being able to simplify it.
But Notice that those two Big debate topics (I think = I am/ Discovery VS Creating/and many more)
All depends on ONE crucial preliminary - "pattern of sth proves existence of sth"

So yep! does pattern of sth proves existence of sth ? Time to blew our minds :P

Point (1) is highly debatable as well.
Jack_Dead
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2016 4:20:51 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
yeah, point 1 definitely is, but currently, Thoughts have too many definitions (conscious/mind/idea of sth...etc) So i just used the most scientific method to approach this question - electrical impulse. (yep that is kind of cheating :P)