do we actually exist?

Question

in an episode of cosmos by carl sagan , he states that all life is made up of 'bitts' i.e. a 'bitt' representing the answer to a yes or no question -similar to the game twenty questions. an example of this would be for a dog 'does it have fur' -yes (1 bitt) 'does it have four legs' -yes (2 bitts) this means that all life and creation is the result of a genetic pattern of yes and no answers which , when put together , create a gam of not 20 but millions of questions.

however all questions and answers have an equall opposing answer that just cancels it out and some questions even cancel themselves out for. therfore if all question cancel themselves out in some form how do we exist ? are we nothing?

Discuss...

Answer 1

"all questions and answers have an equal and opposing answer that just cancels it out"

That is a FALSE SUPPOSITION. Not all questions are "yes or no" questions as you say Carl Sagan described. Besides, Carl Sagan saying that all life can be described by a series of yes/no questions, does not mean that living things actually ARE those questions.
Even if all living things were made up of answered yes/no questions, the possibillity of an opposite answer does not mean that it actually exists in reality, or, if it does, that it will "cancel out" the original. For example, if there were only two possibilities, "fur" and "four legs," the existence of something without fur or four legs would not cancel out the existence of a dog.

But those are unnecessary arguments because, as I said, not all questions are yes/no (try, "what color is it?") and Carl Sagan's apparent attempt to reduce living things existentially to logical bits is nonsense, even as a matter of description; it would take infinitely many such yes/no questions to describe a complex organism, thus it is a silly thing to try.
Carl Sagan is not a bioligist. He is not even a philosopher. He is a cosmologist.
If you want to jump into a Cartesian dungeon, go ahead. But me, I still exist.

Answer 2

I think, therefore I am; a famous quote on the same topic.

Just how real are we, are we a simulation in a complex computer? Are we figments in the imagination of a god like being, or are we really solid and do we exist? I think, therefore I am something that thinks; If feel like I am alive, I feel like I am real so I assume that I am real. To do anything else is to ask for trouble. If I don’t assume reality then I won’t worry about the little things like drinking water and eating. Don’t laugh this has happened; a recent case of a compulsive video gamer who died of dehydration because he wouldn’t stop playing a video game. He ignored his body, for the pleasure of the artificial reality of the game and suffered for it.

Religion’s main purpose is to explain the unexplainable. So many people with these questions turn to God, pick your own flavor or brand. So far we don’t have any information beyond faith, except for collections of “holy text” that the users claim is totally accurate, despite some clear and present errors.

Those how find problems with religion turn to the alternate religion of Science. In the end it is a case of faith, a case that can be proved by independent observation and theory, but still a case of faith.

Did the dinosaurs really exist, or where the fossils planted to make us think they did? Does a falling tree in the forest make a noise if there is no one there to listen? What happens when you leave a room, does time stand still? Is the simulation only running for you or is it independent of you. Or is reality running objectively or is it dependent on you?

The only way us poor mortals have to work out these problems is to assume reality exists. The dinosaurs exists, the “Big Bang” really happened, a falling tree makes noise no matter who is or isn’t around and so on.

As to what Carl Sagan was talking about it was DNA. All systems need a programming to operate. A clock is a complicated set of gears, levels and an escape mechanism that sets up its program. A computer uses conventional computer programming and life, as we understand it, uses DNA.

Why do dogs and apes have fur, but we don’t? It is because of the coding in our DNA. Each bit of code determines what characteristics make an up a creature. We share 95% of the same characteristics as an ape, the little differences though makes a huge difference. Human and ape DNA has the bit for bipedal locomotion, although in the human it is better. Dogs, cats and a lot other animals are coded for a 4 legged form of transportation.

A human fetus undergoes a speeded up form of evolution and at one point even has gills. It is assumed that it its going through its old DNA processing until it comes up with the final creature; a human boy or girl.

We don’t understand all of DNA, we find a lot of areas that seem to be leftovers that got stuck; maybe even evolutionary dead ends. We find other pieces that don’t see to do anything and we find only a small part that is actually active.

Answer 3

If the answer is "no" (a null response), that is just as significant as a "yes" answer.
If you consider all the possible questions (not just "does it have 4 legs", but also "does it have 1 leg, 2 legs, 3 legs, 8 legs", etc.) then you have an almost infinite number of questions and therefore of answers.

Even if the answers cancel out some of the questions, there is still a HUGE number of responses that aren't cancelled out.
So, we exist as a result of those responses left that aren't cancelled out.

Its very much like the matter-antimatter problem in the 1980's.
For every billion of particles of antimatter created in the Big Bang there were one billion and one particles of matter created.
And it's that tiny excess of matter that gave rise to all the matter we see in the universe.

Answer 4

Life is a series of bits of information in relation to DNA, but not in any other sense that I know of.

If the nature of the universe is unknown and unknowable then this statement itself would be untrue because we would "know" the universe is unknowable.

If nothing can be proven unless it undergoes the rigorous scientific method, then this statement can not be proven because it cannot undergo testing of the scientific method.

If we do not exist, then these statements do not exist, the house I live in does not exist, the keyboard I am typing on does not exist. The objects we touch are largely made up of free space, it is the reactions at the subatomic level that let us feel something. So do we exist? Well probably about 99.999% of what composes us is empty space so we basically barely exist, but we exist nonetheless.

I think, therefore I am.

Answer 5

Clearly we exist, by point of this discussion. The real question here is, Where do we not exist? Where are those other answers? Some people theorize that this alternate reality is contained in other demensions that our existant form cannot perceive, others say it exists (or ant-exists) in perallel universes. The truth is, this is a philosophical question, only answerable by imagination, because clearly, we exist in some form, be it imaginary or real.

Answer 6

No , we don`t REALLY exist . We`re actually figments of someone else`s imagination , which in turn causes our imaginary minds to see other imaginary humans , to which you and I are imaginary .

We`re cancelled out by opposing questions , which is the key to non-existence to someone who`s imagining we don`t exist , although we do , but only in their imaginary minds .

Answer 7

Yes we exist...but that question is kinda confusing...From a religious point, we exist because God created us...but I don't know what you believe in...I also agree with that other guy. How could you be asking this question if you didn't exist? And, in turn, how could we be answering your question if we didn't exist?

Answer 8

why don't you take ur puppateer techniques somewhere else.
and we don't, we're really the imagination of a sentient super computer created by an alien race.
now i'm gonna die for realizing that.
the boulder fell.

Answer 9

I exist. You however are just a figment of my imagination. Now I will forget you forever. Prepare for your destruction. Wa ha ha ha ha

Answer 10

Taking a quotation from Descartes' Discourse on Method, "Je pense, donc je suis" ("I think, so I am," more commonly translated as, "I think, therefore I am").