In studying philosophy, did you ever doubt the existence of the external world?

Question

With so many unanwerable hypothesis which attack the veracity of the senses:

What if I'm in the Matrix?

What if I'm dreaming?

What if I'm some kind of "experiment"?

What if everyone else is a robot?

Am I the only being with a mind (solipsism) and everyone just appears to have one?

What if I'm God and created this universe and put myself in it only to forget I did so?

What if I'm a computer program or a holographic program?

I've heard all of these ideas and much, much more. They are very common in philosophy. So, have you ever thought about these questions? What conclusions did you come to?

Answer 1

I call this 'hamster theory'. But that's just me.

If you wanted to, you could make ANY theory more complex. You could say that invisible, intangible hamsters are moving things around when nobody is paying attention, that they propogate photons through empty space, or that it is hamsters that cause two people to fall in love. And it would be impossible to disprove, because that's part of your theory (even if you could measure them, the hamsters would just change the results anyway).

Does that mean it is a valuable use of time to consider hamster theory (or other theories like them)? I don't know anyone who would seriously think that was the case. And there's a reason why, of course.

The reason is usually referred to as Ockham's Razor: the simplest theory that still fits all the facts is probably the correct one. And it makes sense - if you have a good explanation for what's going on, then adding excess complexity is only likely to muddy the waters. Einstein put this a good way: "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."

And that's the commonality with all the ideas you proposed - they all require multiple extra universes of complexity. It may not seem like it at first. But if what we see is an illusion, then there are at least TWO things going on instead of one: what SEEMS to be and what REALLY IS. And though most people may not know it, this is why they're skeptical of such ideas - to make them work you have to create an entire invisible unmeasure universe.

So I'll stick with the philosopher John Locke on this one. He once said about people who choose to believe that their life is but a dream: "...if our dreamer pleases to try whether the glowing heat of a glass furnace be barely a wandering imagination in a drowsy man's fancy, by putting his hand into it, he may perhaps be wakened into a certainty greater than he could wish, that it is something more than bare imagination."

Answer 2

Whatever has been taught are principles popping out of the lifestyles enjoy of an individual who had the potential to carry it into phrases, that may be understood and be included into ones possess already centered international view. In to this point functioning as a body or entice, giving a style of highbrow protection, however preserving the individual caught and confined, generally now not open for any new have an impact on. Not to enter such entice, one best can restrict any style of philosophy, so bigger now not studying any publication. The excellent publication absolutely is the 'publication of lifestyles'. The philosophy one will reap and expand need to now not be written down, manifesting ones highbrow estate. Ones philosophy will also be excellent lived and not anything else. One will grow to be the intense shining solar, warming throughout... Then there are not able to exist any query what philosophy is the excellent, given that there is not any separation while residing it... InkyPinkie

Answer 3

With what CMIKS stated, this is the basis of much of what Descartes theorized and wrote about.

Long story short, every sense can deceive you. Sight, sound, touch, all can give you false information, and therefore, ultimately cannot be trusted. You see, hear, feel, (smell and taste if you so desire :P ) those around you, but as you cannot trust your sense, you cannot truely prove they are there. He would revert to the thought that what if our brain was just in some lab somewhere in a jar being manipulated with electrical pulses which caused us to preceive this existance (matrix anyone?).

When he boiled it all down, he came to one base truth. "I think therefore I am." Meaning I am here contemplating my existance, and in whatever way I'm being tricked or fooled, there is SOMETHING to me that can be fooled. That something is the only true ME I have. Your conciousness is your proof of you. That's the only thing he couldn't disprove.

His works are very good reads and I would suggest spending some time with them. Supposedly a philosophy friend of mine claims further philosophers disproved/expanded these truths, but like you, I achieved this realization more on my own than by guidance, and when I read Descartes it was more of a "EXACTLY!" feeling than a "wow, I hadn't thought of that before" feeling.

Answer 4

You posses the evidence of your senses to indicate to you that reality does in fact exist.
Do you have anything by which you could rationally justify your rejecting all of the evidence that your senses and memory provide to indicate that this reality does not exist?
Note that I say "rationally" as the propositions, which you put forth in doubt of reality are not really rational if examined closely. If not then by the Principle of the Conservation of Belief, one is quite justified in asserting that the reality around us does exist, as we perceive it. I for one do not doubt the reality, which I perceive though I accept that perception is relative from individual to individual.

Answer 5

i think about this kind of stuff all the time. its hard not to feel like you are the center of your universe at times. especially when you see things happen randomly that seem specifically catered to you. i am very seldom surprised by others making this even more valid at times.

Answer 6

I always do. Who is right? Who is wrong? Am I considered wrong just because I do not believe the same thing you do?

Have you ever read Plato's The Cave?

Answer 7

Yes I have studied and given much thought for many years about what you ask.

We are god/goddess spiritual beings having a human experience. We are attached by a fine golden strand to everyone and everything. We are all things that you mentioned because everything is of a higher power just as we are. We are here to re-member who we really are.

It takes deep thinking to get a better understanding of the universe we are in, and how it works.

Answer 8

Philosopher René Descartes also doubted his existence so he started with the most basic premise -- that he was a thinking person -- and posited, "cogito ergo sum," in English: "I think, therefore I am."

Good luck on your philosophical journey.

Answer 9

No,Perenialist Realism,especially Thomism,seemed to remove that temptation for me

Answer 10

What if someone watches to many movies?...lol

I think it is important to know that being created by God, and by God showing us the ultimate expression of His love for us in Jesus Christ, and by Jesus Christ calling me brother and friend, that is enough to prove to me that I am much more than just something, I am someone, special and loved, loving and caring.

God bless always.