I Exist
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
I Exist
"I exist."
Can anyone here prove or disprove this statement?
Can anyone here prove or disprove this statement?
- David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
- David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
How do you define existence?Unidian wrote:There is awareness, therefore there is existence.
My body is inside my clothes. My mind is inside my body.How do you distinguish "this body and mind?" Where are you setting the boundaries?
Last edited by Matt Gregory on Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
-
- Posts: 509
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:22 pm
....and the above reply proves the existence of, hopefully a person, that identifies itself as David.DavidQuinn000 wrote:Then clearly, the existence of your message proves your existence.
-
So, in my opinion, everything one experiences, including what animals and all things that have some sort of sensory perception, exists. One has to be a total idiot to think otherwise, or simply harbor an arrogant wishful thinking full of himself.
To exist is to present an appearance. That an appearance is presented is self-evident, given that there is awareness. If an appearance were not presented, there would be nothing to be aware of. Therefore, there is existence.
If I am aware, I exist. The real question is, what am "I?"
If I am aware, I exist. The real question is, what am "I?"
I live in a tub.
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
Isn't the "I" the same thing as awareness?
I've been trying to figure out what awareness is.
Is it the process of our perceptions being transferred to our memory?
Or is it the recollection of mental associations when we perceive or think of something? E.g. a certain type of cylindrical shape appears and the word (or the thought) "cup" appears shortly after.
That's all I've been able to come up with so far.
I've been trying to figure out what awareness is.
Is it the process of our perceptions being transferred to our memory?
Or is it the recollection of mental associations when we perceive or think of something? E.g. a certain type of cylindrical shape appears and the word (or the thought) "cup" appears shortly after.
That's all I've been able to come up with so far.
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
Awareness
I think we have to recollect the perception that we are currently experiencing in order to become aware of it.
Think of the "Where's Waldo?" books. We can perceive Waldo because he's in the picture, but we don't become aware of him until we find him and specifically recollect him in our mind.
I don't think awareness can occur until we have a specific recollection of the thing we are experiencing, even though it may seem redundant on the surface.
Think of the "Where's Waldo?" books. We can perceive Waldo because he's in the picture, but we don't become aware of him until we find him and specifically recollect him in our mind.
I don't think awareness can occur until we have a specific recollection of the thing we are experiencing, even though it may seem redundant on the surface.
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Matt wrote:
I don't think so. That is nothing more than an inflow. Where is "our memory"?
That is part of the definition of thought, which I would more fully define as: the collection, recollection, association, disassociation (analysis) of mental objects.
Awareness could be defined as consciousness of that process.
It is true, however, that not everyone is aware. Aware of being aware is awareness.
The “I†is a collection of ideas that make the individual -- those concepts that give and shape identity, individuality and, thus, determine activity and non-activity, inflow and outflow.
Since all things, in actuality, arise at the same time -- including the idea of re-collection -- awareness is the enlightened “I“ that perceives its relationship to all things and the relationship of all things to itself.
Is it the process of our perceptions being transferred to our memory?
I don't think so. That is nothing more than an inflow. Where is "our memory"?
Or is it the recollection of mental associations when we perceive or think of something? E.g. a certain type of cylindrical shape appears and the word (or the thought) "cup" appears shortly after.
That is part of the definition of thought, which I would more fully define as: the collection, recollection, association, disassociation (analysis) of mental objects.
Awareness could be defined as consciousness of that process.
It is true, however, that not everyone is aware. Aware of being aware is awareness.
The “I†is a collection of ideas that make the individual -- those concepts that give and shape identity, individuality and, thus, determine activity and non-activity, inflow and outflow.
Since all things, in actuality, arise at the same time -- including the idea of re-collection -- awareness is the enlightened “I“ that perceives its relationship to all things and the relationship of all things to itself.
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
Leyla,
In our bodies, I guess.Matt wrote:
Is it the process of our perceptions being transferred to our memory?
I don't think so. That is nothing more than an inflow. Where is "our memory"?
Perhaps, but how do you know those four activities are irreducible? Maybe there is one principle that underpins all of them?Or is it the recollection of mental associations when we perceive or think of something? E.g. a certain type of cylindrical shape appears and the word (or the thought) "cup" appears shortly after.
That is part of the definition of thought, which I would more fully define as: the collection, recollection, association, disassociation (analysis) of mental objects.
Awareness could be defined as consciousness of that process.
Then we can never be aware because you would have to be aware of the awareness of being aware, aware of the awareness of the awareness of being aware, etc. It would never end.It is true, however, that not everyone is aware. Aware of being aware is awareness.
You mean the totality of a person's ideas?The “I” is a collection of ideas that make the individual -- those concepts that give and shape identity, individuality and, thus, determine activity and non-activity, inflow and outflow.
What do you mean by "arise" and how do all things do this at the same time?Since all things, in actuality, arise at the same time -- including the idea of re-collection -- awareness is the enlightened “I“ that perceives its relationship to all things and the relationship of all things to itself.
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
I think a better way to ask this question would be like this:
We have six types of sense objects that appear to the self: sights, sounds, feelings, smells, tastes, and thoughts. The question is: how can a receiver of these appearances be established? If we see a body from the perspective of looking out from it, isn't that just an object of vision and therefore isn't the actual perceiver? If the thought of "I am the receiver of these appearances" appears, does that make it true? Couldn't the "I" just be a linguistic convenience?
We have six types of sense objects that appear to the self: sights, sounds, feelings, smells, tastes, and thoughts. The question is: how can a receiver of these appearances be established? If we see a body from the perspective of looking out from it, isn't that just an object of vision and therefore isn't the actual perceiver? If the thought of "I am the receiver of these appearances" appears, does that make it true? Couldn't the "I" just be a linguistic convenience?
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Isn't that a bit like asking if the thought that A=A appears, does that make it true?If the thought of "I am the receiver of these appearances" appears, does that make it true?
Since you appear to have different thoughts to me, can I not accurately assume that you are experiencing your experiences and not mine?
- Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
It's not the same because A=A only refers to the appearance, whereas the "I" has no relation. It just came out of nowhere as far as I can tell.Isn't that a bit like asking if the thought that A=A appears, does that make it true?
How did you come to that conclusion? If a thought appears to you, doesn't that make it your thought? If it didn't appear to you, then how did you become aware of it to say that it's different?Since you appear to have different thoughts to me, can I not accurately assume that you are experiencing your experiences and not mine?
Why do you think that you think?
Yes. The ego is just an object of thought, like any other thought, and has no special status. It does not have inherent existence.Matt Gregory wrote: Couldn't the "I" just be a linguistic convenience?
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
In the form of genes/DNA?Matt: Is it [I/awareness] the process of our perceptions being transferred to our memory?
Leyla: I don't think so. That is nothing more than an inflow. Where is "our memory"?
Matt: In our bodies, I guess.
I would think there would be some relationship between memory, DNA and genes. But the memories of a single lifespan?