"Nothing exists except through human consciousness" -George Orwell, 1984
Reminds me of an old riddle.
Q: "What was the tallest mountain before Mount Everest?"
A: Mount Everest. It just wasn't discovered yet
What do you think?
2007-12-29 20:14:37 · 15 answers · asked by pikester666 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Descartes's reflections on mind and mechanism began the strain of western thought that much later, impelled by the invention of the electronic computer and by the possibility of machine intelligence, blossomed into the Turing test and related thought. His most famous statement is: Cogito ergo sum (French: Je pense, donc je suis; English: I think, therefore I am), found in §7 of part I of Principles of Philosophy (Latin) and in part IV of Discourse on the Method (French).
2007-12-29 20:23:44 · answer #1 · answered by J 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's true. We don't know everything that exists, or that is possible. I believe Orwell was challenging us to not be afraid to risk things, experiment and push ourselves. We should strive to always learn and grow, and not be complacent and lazy.
Expand your consciousness. Go to college. Read. Perform service for other people. Participate in politics. The greater that your consciousness reaches, the more you will be capable of and the more you will be able to help others.
We shouldn't find excuses to do the things we don't want to do. If we want to lose weight, we should do it. If we want to be a published author, an athlete, a millionaire, a painter, an astronaut, whatever, we should do it and not make excuses. Reach for your dreams.
2007-12-29 20:23:25 · answer #2 · answered by Sam P 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, in answer to your original question.
Our knowledge is limited to our existence.
That limitation is our motivation to expand our knowledge in order to expand our existence.
Of course, once one realizes that everything is within us it becomes much easier not to fight the knowledge of our existence.
And then the Mount Everest of our being becomes self evident.
Mr. Orwell was almost correct. But the fact is that not everything with consciousness is human.
2007-12-29 20:30:06 · answer #3 · answered by Temple 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is a question which has long been debated by philosophers, and as you can probably guess, it's question which has not been settled conclusively.
I agree to certain extents that our existences, indeed, are limited to what we know. However, perhaps a bit of rephrasing might help. I would argue that our existences are limited by what we know. What little we can do is restricted by what little knowledge we have at our disposal which enables us to take action.
Perhaps you might be interested in reading what others had to say on the topic. As J has pointed out (kudos for the citations!), Descartes had his (very well-known) opinions on the subject. Other writers of the Enlightenment era might interest you as well, but that's as far as I know in regards to the topic.
2007-12-29 20:25:53 · answer #4 · answered by theintrepiddodger 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wouldn't it be more accurate for George to have said, "Nothing exists except through my consciousness?" You know, how does he know humans or anything exists except through his own consciousness. That is different from giving something a name in order for it to exists. Naming everything isn't necessary for everything to exists, but your consciousness is necessary.
Gee, isn't my logic astounding? Orwell's? Not a so a mucha.
2007-12-29 20:34:04 · answer #5 · answered by stale mate 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If our existance is limited to what we know, then a person locked in a prison with unlimited reading material to learn from, would be living the richest life possible.
2007-12-29 20:36:38 · answer #6 · answered by insignificant_other 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You state that our existence is limited to what we know. Well there's imagination. It's becoming more and more important in the modern age. It has always been the causal factor in our progression (inventions). But in a totally rational sense, I agree with you.
2007-12-29 20:23:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yea, you're right. Whats the use? Is that all there is? I'm bored, Stop this merry-go-round and let me off. If I knew more, there'd be more.
2007-12-29 20:19:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both very wise comments indeed.
You seem like a very phylsophical person
^^^ Srry I cant spell very well
2007-12-29 20:17:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, its pretty much right
nothing exists to us unless we discover it
but if there was no life there would still b atoms and all that stuff but no1 to detect them and remember them
2007-12-29 20:30:55 · answer #10 · answered by LeeRoy88 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋