did you know that reality and all of you were created from my mind???

Question

and my mind only. i created all of you subconciously and non of you realy exist. the only thing that can be known is my thoughts my emotions and my experiences. therefore i am the ONLY mind. how can you prove that you even exist if i cant experience you in any way other than the five basic senses which were created by me. sort of like phantom pains.

do you beleive me? if not than prove me wrong!!

Answer 1

well I Believe you - But Can You Do Me A Favor... Make Me Get laid Tonite!

Answer 2

HAHAH! It is you, indeed, my creation, that has been fooled into thinking this through my own doing; for you see, it is I who has created you and the world in which I have chosen to allow you to exist. No, I am not God, I am not great, I am simply a child with an ant farm and a magnifying glass, a sadistic thought, and abortion of the universal big bang theory. You can not prove that you exist, if it were not for me, you would be less than a figment of absence-a whole nothing. You see, you cannot prove I am wrong, but I can prove you are for I punctuate my words and even capitalize my sentences. If I were truly your phantom pain you would have already punctuated correctly.

But you can have a cookie for the immense effort it took for your mind to encompass this.

Answer 3

I totally believe you and as your mind and your phantom pain I order you now to get up your chair and take any longer hammer shaped tool you find in your house, (apartment) and bang it hard ten times on your head. If it does not hurt then you are the phantom pain of my mind and you do not exist. If it does hurt you have a choice. Put an icepack on your head or master your mind and let the pain disappear. If the second possibility works, you were right. Please let me know what you found out.

Answer 4

Why all the anxiety? Whether is true or not, how does it change anything? Do you think you might suddenly wake up or suffer senility and lose everything? You wouldn't miss it if you didn't remember it. The creation (supposedly in your mind) is beyond the control of your mind. That's what's bothering you.

The proof you have asked for is not available.

Even if all of reality is a figment of your imagination, explore it and enjoy the ride.

Answer 5

OK, Kev K. I understand you are an author and you have created characters so life like that you need to communicate who the real creator is and the characters need to understand they only exist when you give them a place on the pages of a book or even through a film. I understand your dilemma. You have written yourself into a corner and you need to write your way out. have a nice day.

Answer 6

Do you mean that when you die, your brain will switch off and nothing will exist any more?
Well, i suppose this is true - its true for you anyway because your brain will definitely stop and everything will dissappear - unless you believe in spiritual stuff, in which case you might carry on living as a higher consciousness beyond your brain. And you might even find yourself in a universal collective consciousness which will prove to you that you are not alone! :-)
I wish you a pleasant journey :-)

Answer 7

Thanks for the nice house and great family.

Proving you wrong is easy. When you don't exist, I still will exist. As has everything that existed before you.

Now, you may not acknowledge that, but empirical science will show that it is true, and just because you don't acknowledge something doesn't make it false.

Or, as Nirvana once said...just because you're paranoid...don't mean they're not after you...

Answer 8

I don't believe you.

However if we do not hold any common first principles, then we can't argue. In order to present a *necessary* demonstration which proves the other wrong, we must have some common first principle from which to argue. Otherwise, no matter what arguments you give, they won't convince me. As Aquinas explains in the Summa Theologica:

"[I]n regard to the philosophical sciences, that the inferior sciences neither prove their principles nor dispute with those who deny them, but leave this to a higher science; whereas the highest of them, viz. metaphysics, can dispute with one who denies its principles, if only the opponent will make some concession; but if he concede nothing, it can have no dispute with him, though it can answer his objections."

You claim "the five basic senses...were created by me" and also that all sense impressions and sense experiences are caused by your "subconscious." In short, all your experiences are purely a priori and NONE of them--I wish Yahoo! would allow us to use bold so I wouldn't have to shout!--are a posteriori. There is no reason to assume that anything exists outside of your mind.

I disagree with your assumption that you created your "five basic senses." I assume you also hold that my consciousness, which I experience first hand, is created by your subconscious. Well, I disagree with that from experience.

We can't argue productively from your statements, since no matter what I say, you will object to my first principles. Your position is very similar to Hume.

For the sake of argument, let us assume that I am created by your subconscious and that you "are the ONLY mind." I have a few questions (these are objections I thought of off the top of my head. They are not necessarily fallacy free. Take 'em for what they're worth):

1) Are you merely the only MIND in existence or are you the only entity in existence? If you are merely the only MIND in existence (i.e. all other existing things are irrational, like rocks and plants), and if you created your own senses--the only way in which you would be able to relate to the outside world--then some of your experiences might be caused a posteriori by these other entities. However you would not be able to know anything about these other entities as they exist in themselves, ergo they could be rational beings. Your senses, which you made yourself, wouldn't allow you to know about the true quiddities of these external objects. They might be rational beings. Therefore, your unconditional statement that you are the ONLY mind is not necessary. You would only know that you cannot know if there are any other minds which exist, due to your complete a priori source of experience.

(This argument is loosely based on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason....f.y.i., I disagree with Kant's first principles, but I do admit that his argument seems to follow if you grant those premises).

2) Are you eternal? If you aren't, then there was some time when do did not exist. If there was some time when you did not exist, then you must have been created. However, no created thing can be the per se cause of its existence. Therefore, you must have been created by some cause other than you. If this is the case, then you would not be the cause of reality, since reality existed before you were caused (i.e. whatever entity created you existed before you, both temporally and causally, and therefore reality existed before you).

I assume that you are not aware of having existed eternally, that all your experiences come from a certain finite period of time. If you were eternal, then your experiences ought not to be limited to a certain finite length of time. If this is the case, the finite period of your experiences would imply that you are not eternal. But if you are not eternal, then you must have been created at some time. But this contradicts the statement that you are the ONLY mind.

Neither do you have necessary grounds to assume that whatever entity created you ceased to exist the moment you came into being, nor do you have any reason to believe that this other entity isn't also a MIND. Additionally, if all of reality is merely created by your subconscious, this only means that you cannot trust anything you sense. It does NOT conclude necessarily that no other entities exist.

Finally (a little dose of your own medicine), if "the only thing that can be known is [sic] my thoughts my emotions and my experiences," but all your experiences originate from you subconscious, why not suppose that your thoughts and emotions originate from your subconscious. But if these all originate from your subconscious, then your consciousness is merely a construction of your subconscious. However, if you do not directly experience your subconscious (since it is Subconscious), what is your reason to assume that this "subconscious" belongs to you? Couldn't your "consciousness" merely be the creation of some other entity? You might merely be part of a "universal consciousness" as the answer above correctly points out. Therefore, you really wouldn't exist as such.

My fundamental question would be this: Why would you assume that your sense EXPERIENCE is purely a priori (rather than origin of your sensations being a posteriori)? And more fundamentally, why would you assume that your sense experience doesn't correspond with reality? Namely, when you perceive some object, you naturally think that it is a separately existing entity. Why doubt that your ideas and sense impressions correspond to reality? (An Aristotelian objection to Kant). These, in the end, come down to disagreements on first principles.

P.S. I hope you don't live life according to your claims... Here is a quote from Hume describing the practical applications of such doubts: "On the contrary, he must acknowledge, if he will acknowledge anything, that all human life must perish, were his principles universally and steadily to prevail. All discourse, all action would immediately cease; and men remain in a total lethargy, till the necessities of nature, unsatisfied, put an end to their miserable existence." I guess you must either fancy yourself God or submit to the moderate skepticism that Hume goes on to promote? Or, of course, you merely might have been attempting to mess with the members of Y!A. :P

P.P.S. Does this reality which your mind creates not have any rules of grammar or spelling? Just wondering. ;)

Answer 9

Considering the condition of the world there is a strong inclination to say "You sick illegitimate south bound end of a north bound horse."

Answer 10

You are an excellent example of "illusion of central position." This delusion that life cannot go forward without you is more common than you would expect.

Answer 11

ah, finally someone to take the burden off me!

hey, while youre thinking up a bunch of stuff...go get me a beer and a philly cheesesteak with extra cheese!