what is existence?

[sushi]

what exist and what doesnt exist (outside of self)

what exists as abstract form (information or memory) or a real/physical from

i would say A exist or is real because it can be moved and touched or has physical/tangilbe form,

if one cannot move or touch or sense it then it is not real in relation to you.

what about the existence of time, can it be moved or touched?

 

[onesteptwostep]

What is thinking

 

[sushi]

existence implies what is real or not real, must have some physical or tangible form (outside your brain and body)

can this law be broken or violated, something that exists but have no physical or tangible form
a thing exists because it has a physical or tangible form, otherwise it is merely an idea or abstraction or memory.

 

[sushi]

does existence necessary= physical existence?

can non-physical objects exist, what does it mean to have physical quality anyway,

 

[Cognisant]

You can't prove a negative, not because a negative isn't true but rather because the positive needs to be true before you can prove the negative. For example I can't prove unicorns don't exist, it is a reasonable assumption, but if unicorns don't exist then what is a unicorn if not defined by its nonexistence? Thus even if one were to genetically engineer a bio-luminescent white horse with a narwhal horn sticking out of its head, a creature that could only be described as a unicorn, we would still have to specify that it is merely genetically engineered imitation of a unicorn, because unicorns don't exist and since this does it clearly can't be a unicorn.

Don't do epistemological skepticism, it makes you feel smart but sound stupid.

 

[sushi]

the conditions of existence imv are:

what exists must possess these three things, presence, form and quality, what does not must possess neither,

i am trying to figure out the difference between existence and non existence of external objects. form can either be tangible or intangible. the negative of something must be the positive of something.

then one will inquire further what is form and quality/essence.

i am not sure what you meant cog but i will try to follow your tips. maybe you can elaborate.

 

[Cognisant]

Before we can make any argument certain fundamental assumptions need to be made, for instance lets say I'm holding a can of SPAM, does this can of SPAM exist?

I appears to exist but can I trust appearances and if I can't trust appearances how can I be certain of anything and if I can't be certain of anything how can I be sure if anything exists and if I don't know if anything exists how do I even know what existence is?

It's good to have an open mind but if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out, before we can question whether or not a can of SPAM exists we first need a reason to question it. If unlike everything else we interact with cans of SPAM have uncertain ontological inertia, that is to say if you look away a can of SPAM might not be there when you look back only to inexplicably appear elsewhere. If that were the case then we would have good cause to question the existence of SPAM, maybe SPAM exists but has some inter-dimensional property, maybe it's just a hallucination, maybe we never saw the SPAM but something is causing us to remember the past incorrectly, etc.

But without a good reason to do so asking these questions is kinda silly.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Do you have some thought disorder? You seem to be unable to follow your own thoughts. Often in these threads you ask things and it looks like word salad to me.
You seem to use words in very loose way and often go from post to post changing meaning of the same words you use. Either use words properly or at least stick to your own definition of words, but if you use unconventional definitions it would be easier to talk if you actually provide definition of words.
Any silly person can toss words around.

Am I real is Barney real is COVID real is idea real is nothing real if it is nothign etc. booring and nonsense.

 

[sushi]

to understand what existence is , i decided to use God as an example

i can argue that God can exist because he has form and presence, qualitty and geometry

while i can also argue god cannot exist because i cannot sense his form and presence quailty and geometry.

He seems intangilbe and non- present, therefore implying non existence

the same principle could be applied to ghosts or fictional creatures.

presence precedes existence, for a thing to exist, it must be present.

 

[sushi]

Do you have some thought disorder? You seem to be unable to follow your own thoughts. Often in these threads you ask things and it looks like word salad to me.
You seem to use words in very loose way and often go from post to post changing meaning of the same words you use. Either use words properly or at least stick to your own definition of words, but if you use unconventional definitions it would be easier to talk if you actually provide definition of words.
Any silly person can toss words around.

Am I real is Barney real is COVID real is idea real is nothing real if it is nothign etc. booring and nonsense.

you sound like an idiot so i am only entertain you with the below response only,

Yes , I could be writing nonsense , gibberish, or word salad as you put it, but you are the one who choose to open and read my post/thread etc. no one is putting a gun in your head to read and enjoy my posts. Maybe you should start blaming you eyes?

 

[ZenRaiden]

you sound like an idiot so i am only entertain you with the below response only,

Maybe I sound like, but I am pretty sure my response was on point and if you cannot see that it is not my problem.

Yes , I could be writing nonsense , gibberish, or word salad as you put it, but you are the one who choose to open and read my post/thread etc.

So is this confession that this thread is nonsense, gibberish and word salad or are you willing to write something meaningful for change?

no one is putting a gun in your head to read and enjoy my posts

I can read what I want and think what I want. No gun is necessary for that.
Question is whether you can articulate a point that is relatable?

Maybe you should start blaming you eyes?

It is not a blame game.

 

[sushi]

nah, I will just continue my way of writing style of gibberish and nonsense, and giving you the middle finger. you however, have the choice of closing your eyes and blocking me.

i came here to write because i am uncertain about concepts and want some meaningful input, which means kind of a thought dump. if i can figure it out everything on my own, i wouldnt have chosen to post and inquire here.

the key concepts of this thread are form, existence, nothing, and being, presnece,, and the title of thread which seeks the answer, its your fault if you have reading comprehension problems and cant grasp it.

 

[ZenRaiden]

nah, I will just continue my way of writing style of gibberish and nonsense, and giving you the middle finger. you however, have the choice of closing your eyes and blocking me.

i came here to write because i am uncertain about concepts and want some meaningful input, which means kind of a thought dump. if i can figure it out everything on my own, i wouldnt have chosen to post and inquire here.

the key concepts of this thread are form, existence, nothing, and being, presnece,, and the title of thread which seeks the answer, its your fault if you have reading comprehension problems and cant grasp it.

See my point as a whole was more along the lines of that you can actually write anything. Writing down stuff just means putting letters into words and words into sentences. It does not necessarily mean what you write makes sense.

In a way it is easy to trick yourself to write down stuff and believe it and think it is right.
However inconsistent writing leads to confusion, that leads to less understanding and less understanding leads to more problems. So your lack of effort to put 2 and 2 together leads to texts that further push you away from understanding the topic.

But if you want others to solve the problem then you at least should be thoughtful enough to know what it is you want to know.
Because from your text it is wholly unclear what you are trying to say or express or understand in which case people can only guess what you mean, without being certain.

For example:

what exist and what doesnt exist (outside of self)

What does this sentence mean? Do you mean to say that what exists is outside of you as person or that it exits also in minds of others or what? What does this question signify?

what exists as abstract form (information or memory) or a real/physical from

Are you trying to claim duality between information and energy or are you trying to learn where does the line stand on what is abstract and real. Because abstraction is basically phyiscal in our brain and memory and if you mean the information independently we might assert that they do exist or do not exist as abstraction.
Or we might say that information and physical stuff is just two sides of the same coin.
We might also simply say that what has energy is real and that which is abstract is not real, but then that is semantics and way we define real.
The problem is these things are not necessarily answerable since it depends on what concept of physical you are using and what you define real.

i would say A exist or is real because it can be moved and touched or has physical/tangilbe form,

Well that defines universe as whole. Everything that interacts with everything else is simply real and is thus the world the universe. Something that cannot interact with other stuff in our universe is not part of it, but suppose we could know a thing in theory that is not part of our universe. The problem is we would not be able to confirm its existence.

if one cannot move or touch or sense it then it is not real in relation to you.

Are you talking of lacking knowledge? However if we do not know about a planet in our solar system and then someone discovers it are you saying that the planet did not exist until I have read the news article where they discovered it?

what about the existence of time, can it be moved or touched?

Yes. I can move the hand of analogue clock back or forward anyway I want. It will not however change the time.

 

[sushi]

For example:

what exist and what doesnt exist (outside of self)

What does this sentence mean? Do you mean to say that what exists is outside of you as person or that it exits also in minds of others or what? What does this question signify?

I was talking objective existence, things existing outside of self and has physical form.
i am pretty sure you get it. i did not imply any thoughts and ideas that exist in other people's minds.

subjective existence is your own existence only.

 

[sushi]

without form and being, a thing or entity could not exist

someone might accuse me of writing word salad, but that is my latest eureka.

 

[gilliatt]

Existence: what is real in the world that one perceives. There is a difference between existence and man-made, there is the 'primacy of existence.' It means existence exists, that the universe exists independent of consciousness, that things are what they are, that they possess the specific nature, an identity. Consciousness perceives what exists, man gains knowledge by looking outward.

 

[Rook]

One can only touch upon wisdom after having viewed the world through a trillion eyes.

 

[sushi]

"realness" is obvious a quality of something

what makes a thing real, the very fact that is it is physical

does it mean a non-physical is non real?

if it is in front of you and it is physical, makes it real.
it all goes back to the philosophical school of physicalism.

if it is real, then it implies existence.

 

[sushi]

if a thing is real, you interact with it, then there is effect and reaction

if a thing is not real, you interact with it, there is no effect and reaction

 

[sushi]

the opposite of existence is obviously lack of existence or thereof.

what is the lack of existence, absence and nothingness is my idea so far.

existence is location dependent, meaning an item/object can only exist in a particular location at a pariticular time.

 

[sushi]

what is existence?
what is a physcial thing or entity made of in order for it to exist and real?

i would break down a entity or object into the following, which is an improvement of my previous

Form, essence, substance. energy, material is the universal makeup of anything that exist, even space and nothingness.

the source and cause of existence should also be included in the material, object.

 

[onesteptwostep]

what is a word

 

[ZenRaiden]

physics (n.)​

1580s, "natural science, the science of the principles operative in organic nature," from physic in sense of "natural science." Also see -ics. Based on Latin physica (neuter plural), from Greek ta physika, literally "the natural things," title of Aristotle's treatise on nature. The current restricted sense of "science treating of properties of matter and energy" is from 1715.





Before the rise of modern science, physics was usually defined as the science of that which is movable, or the science of natural bodies. It was commonly made to include all natural science. At present, vital phenomena are not considered objects of physics, which is divided into general and applied physics. [Century Dictionary, 1895]



physical (adj.)
early 15c., phisical, "medicinal" (opposed to surgical), from Medieval Latin physicalis "of nature, natural," from Latin physica "study of nature" (see physic).
The meaning "pertaining to matter, of or pertaining to what is perceived by the senses" is from 1590s; the meaning "having to do with the body, corporeal, pertaining to the material part or structure of an organized being" (as opposed to mental or moral) is attested from 1780. The sense of "characterized by bodily attributes or activities, being or inclined to be bodily aggressive or violent" is attested from 1970. Physical education is recorded by 1838; the abbreviated form phys ed is by 1955. Physical therapy is from 1922. Related: Physically.


In philosophy, rationalism is the epistemological view that "regards reason as the chief source and test of knowledge"[1] or "any view appealing to reason as a source of knowledge or justification".[2] More formally, rationalism is defined as a methodology or a theory "in which the criterion of the truth is not sensory but intellectual and deductive".[3]

In an old controversy, rationalism was opposed to empiricism, where the rationalists believed that reality has an intrinsically logical structure. Because of this, the rationalists argued that certain truths exist and that the intellect can directly grasp these truths. That is to say, rationalists asserted that certain rational principles exist in logic, mathematics, ethics, and metaphysics that are so fundamentally true that denying them causes one to fall into contradiction. The rationalists had such a high confidence in reason that empirical proof and physical evidence were regarded as unnecessary to ascertain certain truths – in other words, "there are significant ways in which our concepts and knowledge are gained independently of sense experience".[4]

So to me is like you are trying to be a rationalist in essence you want to look for understanding of the word existence without empirical evidence.

Further it seems to be you are trying to resolve an issue of knowing something and resolving an issue of the meaning of the word "existence" that contrast our understanding of certain things which may be outside material or physical.

In essence you want to know if something exists and also fulfills the criteria of not being natural.

That branch was originally called metaphysics.

Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[sushi]

perhaps existence is a process like Life.
but then what about dead objects, or inanimate objects?

a thing merely continues to be a thing until death, transformation change

for example a cup of water continues to be a cup of water until it undergoes change or death

which makes me deduce thing, can a object or thing continue to exist without process and energy? must the existence of an object/stuff be process inclusive, or does it not involve any process?

for a thing to exist, it must perpetuate and reproduce itself in space time. there are microsopic process we cant see which continue to perpetuate the existence of an object.

 

[sushi]

physics (n.)​

1580s, "natural science, the science of the principles operative in organic nature," from physic in sense of "natural science." Also see -ics. Based on Latin physica (neuter plural), from Greek ta physika, literally "the natural things," title of Aristotle's treatise on nature. The current restricted sense of "science treating of properties of matter and energy" is from 1715.





Before the rise of modern science, physics was usually defined as the science of that which is movable, or the science of natural bodies. It was commonly made to include all natural science. At present, vital phenomena are not considered objects of physics, which is divided into general and applied physics. [Century Dictionary, 1895]



physical (adj.)
early 15c., phisical, "medicinal" (opposed to surgical), from Medieval Latin physicalis "of nature, natural," from Latin physica "study of nature" (see physic).
The meaning "pertaining to matter, of or pertaining to what is perceived by the senses" is from 1590s; the meaning "having to do with the body, corporeal, pertaining to the material part or structure of an organized being" (as opposed to mental or moral) is attested from 1780. The sense of "characterized by bodily attributes or activities, being or inclined to be bodily aggressive or violent" is attested from 1970. Physical education is recorded by 1838; the abbreviated form phys ed is by 1955. Physical therapy is from 1922. Related: Physically.


In philosophy, rationalism is the epistemological view that "regards reason as the chief source and test of knowledge"[1] or "any view appealing to reason as a source of knowledge or justification".[2] More formally, rationalism is defined as a methodology or a theory "in which the criterion of the truth is not sensory but intellectual and deductive".[3]

In an old controversy, rationalism was opposed to empiricism, where the rationalists believed that reality has an intrinsically logical structure. Because of this, the rationalists argued that certain truths exist and that the intellect can directly grasp these truths. That is to say, rationalists asserted that certain rational principles exist in logic, mathematics, ethics, and metaphysics that are so fundamentally true that denying them causes one to fall into contradiction. The rationalists had such a high confidence in reason that empirical proof and physical evidence were regarded as unnecessary to ascertain certain truths – in other words, "there are significant ways in which our concepts and knowledge are gained independently of sense experience".[4]

So to me is like you are trying to be a rationalist in essence you want to look for understanding of the word existence without empirical evidence.

Further it seems to be you are trying to resolve an issue of knowing something and resolving an issue of the meaning of the word "existence" that contrast our understanding of certain things which may be outside material or physical.

In essence you want to know if something exists and also fulfills the criteria of not being natural.

That branch was originally called metaphysics.

Correct me if I am wrong.

i am trying deconstruct existence and how does it continue to be there. why doesnt it suddenly vanish or disappear? there must be something intrinsic inside a thing that cause it to continue its form until death or destruction

if existence is process dependent, that the end of the process is the end of existence.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

Time is relative, and we are strongly biased towards believing our perception of reality is omnipresent. We can't go outside of it after all.

But think of microbes in a petri dish. We see them replicate at a phenomenal rate. But what would it feel like to the microbes? How does an ant experience time? What would their "minute" be? Now, how would a higher organism that observes us in a comparative manner to microbes experience time? If we saw the inception of earth forming, to it's state now at a very high speed, mountains would look like ocean waves and clouds and hurricanes would look like gusts of wind that dissipate. I think that with this perspective, things breaking down into their fundamental components, entropy, would seem inevitable. Tis the divinity of biology.

We are matter that has mastered matter to some extent. There are so many evolutionary survival mechanisms buried inside of us that we will probably never know the true nature of existence beyond survive and thrive in how well we do it. go study physics in chemistry and stuff like that if you really want answers

 

[sushi]

I agree that we cant understand our own biological existence, that is why i consider it somewht futil to dwell on own thoughts.

but i am more concerned with outside objects rather than self and internal. knowing and understanding outside objects will tell us more about ourselves.

existence and being is a continuum and it has a direction.

 

[ACW]

does existence necessary= physical existence?

can non-physical objects exist, what does it mean to have physical quality anyway,

I say yes. I believe the physical matter is only the final layer/result of much more complex, majority unseen factors.

Everything living thing is linked to one consciousness. But even non-living things play into it. Everything is energy. Everything has a vibration.

If you have a vibration or an energetic charge, then you exist right?

 

[sushi]

The purpose of here is to understand the philosophy of existence

can existence of an object be deconstructed , from an outside object and its making

the very notion of human existence is tied to experience and persistence.


i found out today is that space is connected experience, and time is connected to existence.

without space one cannot experience and without time one cannot exist. (from my current realized)

fundamentally i hypothesize everything and its existence is mathematical , although this cant be proven ye\t.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

So math is the structure itself, or it's what explains the structure?

Distance between two points implies space, and we know time is needed to travel between the two points. I think you got it backwards. Time makes experience, or experience makes time?

 

[sushi]

So math is the structure itself, or it's what explains the structure?

Distance between two points implies space, and we know time is needed to travel between the two points. I think you got it backwards. Time makes experience, or experience makes time?

i dont know i need more experiments to test my theories

consciousness is link with space, so it is experience from my logical deduction.

Location is tied with existence. a thing only exist in a particular location. If it move away, it exists in a different location. space time defined the location of something.

the whole point is to understand existence and experience, from internal self or from outside. But i think observing and analyzing objects outside of self is better.

 

[sushi]

I think existence is one of the most mysterious things in the universe. or the second law of thermodymanics.

a thing object once to exist, will continue to exist until it ends. but when will the end come?

why does it continue to exist and not disappear into nothingness at any moment, what cause it to continue to be there?

its nothingness really non existence? or does object just become another form when it dies/ends?

 

[sushi]

why is existence a continuum for anything in the universe

like a rock, or a black hole,

why cant it just stop or end at any moment, or disappear to next second

what cause it to continue on?

If it were just quantum particles, it would appear or disappear at any moment

 

[Sandglass]

There are a bunch of wave-particles that are the building blocks for everything and trend towards overall equilibrium (entropy always goes up). Due to complex initial conditions, they can take on complex forms and interactions.

Calling something a "rock" doesn't change what its made of. The name (and general concept) is an abstraction animals are hardwired to use because it has evolutionary benefits.

If I say I have a rock, and then I decide I don't think its a rock anymore, what is it? If I keep grinding my rock down slowly, when does it cease being a rock? My answer would be when I decide it isn't one.

 

[sushi]

the term existence and life is often confused

they could be the same or they could be different

a rock or a thing can exist, but it does not contain life

a human /cell /organism must contains life and existecnce.

but humans contain both life and existence, until death, then his corpse and body continue to exist but his sense of self dies. biological existence is life b it different from normal existence.

 

[PiedPiper]

what exist and what doesnt exist (outside of self)

what exists as abstract form (information or memory) or a real/physical from

i would say A exist or is real because it can be moved and touched or has physical/tangilbe form,

if one cannot move or touch or sense it then it is not real in relation to you.

what about the existence of time, can it be moved or touched?

Some might say that the only thing which exists is your own consciousness which created itself and everything around it. What are human beings but ants once you zoom out, desperately carrying on with their lives, building this ant mound we call earth. To disprove that life is but a creation of the mind would be impossible, because it requires solid evidence, and that evidence isnt available if it's not real.

 

[sushi]

what exist and what doesnt exist (outside of self)

what exists as abstract form (information or memory) or a real/physical from

i would say A exist or is real because it can be moved and touched or has physical/tangilbe form,

if one cannot move or touch or sense it then it is not real in relation to you.

what about the existence of time, can it be moved or touched?

Some might say that the only thing which exists is your own consciousness which created itself and everything around it. What are human beings but ants once you zoom out, desperately carrying on with their lives, building this ant mound we call earth. To disprove that life is but a creation of the mind would be impossible, because it requires solid evidence, and that evidence isnt available if it's not real

From my experience, the consciousness only turn inputs into outputs

inputs are experience and the universe the output is perception and being

 

[sushi]

I speculate There must be root /source of existence inside every object in this universe which is not yet discovered by science. This made the object be present here and now.


the root of all existence inside objects amd material can be called God Soul, whater . This source can be switched on and of. An object is only a container.

the root that cause an object to exist here and now.

like the wave particle analogy, existence and death fluctuates at same time

 

[sushi]

it is right that one cannot prove what exist outside of self.

nevertheless, we are aware of things that are outside of self or things inside of self

the whole concept of being and existence remains unresolved and undefinable either by science or philosophy

Being - New World Encyclopedia

www.newworldencyclopedia.org

 

[sushi]

How do i know if a thing exists?

the first thing is form and observable.


the second thing is evidence and empricism

form is observable. other things like objective evidence of a thing existing is hard to describe.