Author |
Topic: we think therefore we are? (Read 17214 times) |
|
puzzlecracker
Senior Riddler
Men have become the tools of their tools
Gender: 
Posts: 319
|
 |
we think therefore we are?
« on: Dec 3rd, 2004, 9:30pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Have you guys ever been plunged in your thoughts or an occasional daydreaming? It is interesting to notice that when we daydream or contemplate, we always come out as winners... Let's say you have an upcoming interview - prior to it you imagine yourself as a virtuous accomplisher. However, when real-world revealed – we are, on the contrary, not as in retrospect envisioned.
To continue my thought: We sometimes lose in a so-called "Thought-world", but do we really? ... We still win; it just another way to add a colour to it. The idea or a response I am trying to bring about is how the dream world should be managed in order not to have the terminal dissonance when surreal and real MEET.
I still remember as a kid to sleep with toy guns, and imagining my bed as some kind super-duper ship left by aliens....
What do you guys think about this?
|
|
 IP Logged |
While we are postponing, life speeds by
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #1 on: Dec 4th, 2004, 5:37pm » |
Quote Modify
|
We imagine ourselves in various situations as a sort of internal training session. By going through the daydream, we explore possible situations and how we could respond to them. By dreaming of being successful, we bolster our confidence, and train ourselves to make the best responses (at least, the ones we think are best). This makes it more likely we will behave that way when dealing with real situations.
Of course, this is not our conscious purpose for daydreaming, but I believe this is why the activity developed.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
puzzlecracker
Senior Riddler
Men have become the tools of their tools
Gender:
Posts: 319
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #2 on: Dec 4th, 2004, 10:28pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Actually, it is widely perceived that effects are quite opposite at times. Daydreaming induces stress, depression, etc., by realization that all these things we want are not so easily obtained or in the scope of our capital. Especially the cost involved supersedes the resources, and that shuts down a person completely.
|
|
IP Logged |
While we are postponing, life speeds by
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #3 on: Dec 5th, 2004, 8:32am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 3rd, 2004, 9:30pm, puzzlecracker wrote:| It is interesting to notice that when we daydream or contemplate, we always come out as winners... |
|
Really? Mind telling my daydreams that?
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
puzzlecracker
Senior Riddler
Men have become the tools of their tools
Gender:
Posts: 319
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #4 on: Dec 5th, 2004, 12:15pm » |
Quote Modify
|
well you case might be classified into 'dreaddreaming' set 
|
|
IP Logged |
While we are postponing, life speeds by
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #5 on: Dec 5th, 2004, 12:33pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I didn't say the effects of daydreaming are all positive. That is just my theory on why we daydream. But like any other activity we engage in, we have a tendency to "abuse" it. That is, to perform it in ways that do not serve the purposes for which it developed.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
puzzlecracker
Senior Riddler
Men have become the tools of their tools
Gender:
Posts: 319
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #6 on: Dec 5th, 2004, 8:46pm » |
Quote Modify
|
An interesting thought Icarus... the real question is how to turn this innate trait into something positive something that will ensue progress, efficiency, etc., and in turn to minimize or nullify side effects.
|
|
IP Logged |
While we are postponing, life speeds by
|
|
|
puzzlecracker
Senior Riddler
Men have become the tools of their tools
Gender:
Posts: 319
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #7 on: Dec 14th, 2004, 8:10pm » |
Quote Modify
|
By the way, ignoring the subject line as an authoritative and subjective constant, is there a way to actually prove the veracity of human existentiality?
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 14th, 2004, 8:11pm by puzzlecracker » |
IP Logged |
While we are postponing, life speeds by
|
|
|
puzzlecracker
Senior Riddler
Men have become the tools of their tools
Gender:
Posts: 319
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #9 on: Dec 15th, 2004, 8:14am » |
Quote Modify
|
Of, relating to, or dealing with existence.
|
|
IP Logged |
While we are postponing, life speeds by
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #10 on: Dec 15th, 2004, 10:49am » |
Quote Modify
|
And you want the 'relating to' or 'dealing with' proved? It doesn't sound like something which proving can apply to.
If you want prove of human existence, that's simple. If you consider yourself human, at least one human exists (otherwise you couldn't consider yourself anything). If you don't consider yourself human, you still exist, but we can't say anything definite about humans.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
    
Gender:
Posts: 2874
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #11 on: Dec 16th, 2004, 11:09am » |
Quote Modify
|
I've said it before (elsewhere), but while "Cogito Ergo Sum" is a massive leap forwards from not knowing anything, it actually has very little content - all it says is that something with some degree of self-awareness exists - an "I". It says absolutely nothing about what "I" am, or what the universe around me is like (or even if there is one).
At some point you have to make the leap and just conclude that the universe you appear to perceive is remarkably self-consistent, so you might as well accept it as existing (another way of looking at the same thing is to say that the word "exist" actually refers to what we believe the universe we perceive to do). The alternative is to reject "reality" and find yourself denying that you're in a nice padded cell...
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Three Hands
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 715
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #12 on: Dec 18th, 2004, 8:33am » |
Quote Modify
|
Having had extensive teaching on Descartes "Meditations" (which features the famous "Cogito"), if you really want I could go into detail about the arguments Descartes puts forwards, how well they work, and just what we think he was trying to do with them. However, not at this juncture. Suffice to say, rmsgrey's point does a reasonable summation, although Descartes put in a bit more detail...
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 18th, 2004, 8:34am by Three Hands » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
puzzlecracker
Senior Riddler
Men have become the tools of their tools
Gender:
Posts: 319
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #13 on: Dec 19th, 2004, 1:32pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Well, I've read Meditation couple of times over the last few years, unfortunately every argument set forth there can easily be disproved...
I like this line though - "Infinite regression doesn’t in fact imply the existence of God"
Also like the initial example with forest...
Descartes says a lot but proves nothing (to perceive this you need to explore further-- first reading gives erroneous impressions!!!)
..cracker
|
|
IP Logged |
While we are postponing, life speeds by
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #14 on: Dec 19th, 2004, 2:59pm » |
Quote Modify
|
How do you disprove the concept that existance of thought implies existance of the thinker? That one seems rather obvious to me.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
puzzlecracker
Senior Riddler
Men have become the tools of their tools
Gender:
Posts: 319
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #15 on: Dec 19th, 2004, 3:34pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I am not sure if I'm really qualified to disprove it (why would you give weight to [perhaps my] argument not based on experience, as educational for instance, but simply on ruminations?).
Furthermore, I think that the burden of prove is on you to juxtapose the thought with 'am'?
Doesn’t the line go as: "I think therefore I am" or " 'Cogito ergo spud'" - it is not a proven theory, but a hypothesis or hypothetical building block that caters to the rest of the argument. I don’t really disagree with it, and yes – intuitively it makes sense. But is it possible to qualitatively justify it?
...cracker.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 19th, 2004, 3:35pm by puzzlecracker » |
IP Logged |
While we are postponing, life speeds by
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #16 on: Dec 19th, 2004, 7:40pm » |
Quote Modify
|
You are the one who said "every argument set forth there can easily be disproved". Having made this claim, the onus is on you to back it up. Not on me.
However, the proof is obvious: if there is the thought, then there must be, by definition, the thinker. As rmsgrey has said, this is not a strong statement. It makes no claim beyond simple existance. It does not even claim anything about the form of the thinker, or whether the thinker has any existance beyond the thought.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
ThudnBlunder
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
The dewdrop slides into the shining Sea
Gender:
Posts: 4489
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #17 on: Dec 20th, 2004, 3:36am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 19th, 2004, 3:34pm, puzzlecracker wrote:| Doesn’t the line go as: "I think therefore I am" or " 'Cogito ergo spud'". |
|
Yeah, 'Cogito ergo spud ', intoned the couch potato knowingly.
on Dec 19th, 2004, 3:34pm, puzzlecracker wrote:| But is it possible to qualitatively justify it? |
|
Well, an audacious attempt has recently been made to improve on it...
on Dec 17th, 2004, 6:28pm, Icarus wrote:
I think he is saying both, and if he isn't, then I am. |
|
...albeit unsuccessfully.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 20th, 2004, 9:23pm by ThudnBlunder » |
IP Logged |
THE MEEK SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH.....................................................................er, if that's all right with the rest of you.
|
|
|
Three Hands
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 715
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #18 on: Dec 20th, 2004, 5:09am » |
Quote Modify
|
Puzzlecracker, Descartes wrote 6 Meditations, published together. Hence why I refer to his "Meditations". You also seemed to assume that I was implying that the arguments worked absolutely, which I agree, they do not. Aside from the "Cogito", which supplies the basis for the knowledge that something exists in order to think, but not necessarily what the nature of that thinker is, the arguments do not need to be accepted by the reader - they can be shown as not being necessarily true. However, that presumes that Descartes was looking to present a necessarily true argument...
Given that Descartes response to one of Arnauld's objection, which is now famously known as the "Cartesian Circle", was very dismissive of there being a problem, this suggests that, as Descartes was not a fool, he was not looking to present an anlytical argument. Also, the majority of his writing is based on the concept of "clear and distinct ideas", which are generally interpreted as meaning "ideas which, once conceived of, cannot be conceived as being false by the thinker". This has led several modern commentators to suggest that the Meditations were intended to be a process the reader should engage with, and as a guide to thought so that various clear and distinct ideas are first recognised as such, and then allow the reader to figure out how to recognise an idea as clear and distinct. Hence, Descartes' argument is not so much looking to prove as to convince - something which has apparently failed in some cases  So, yes, the arguments can be disproved. However, that doesn't mean that they aren't rational to accept, which is what Descartes was trying to achieve.
It is also interesting to note that the portrayal of scepticism that Descartes creates is far stronger than any sceptical argument previously was. Most sceptics were happy to accept that they existed, and that what they thought internally was safe from doubt. It was just the sensory data of the external world that they doubted.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2874
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #19 on: Dec 20th, 2004, 5:30am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 19th, 2004, 1:32pm, puzzlecracker wrote:| Well, I've read Meditation couple of times over the last few years, unfortunately every argument set forth there can easily be disproved... |
|
That is a very strong assertion - not only that Descartes went through the entire publication without ever once being right, but that one can prove him wrong in every instance, and furthermore, do so easily. This, despite the fact that, as far as I know, "I think therefore I am" is the only provable truth anyone's come up with in 6000 years or trying... Even "necessary existence is a necessary attribute of a perfect being" is too much of a stretch. Anything else is based on the (unstated) universal assumption of WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) - that our senses are largely reliable.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #20 on: Dec 20th, 2004, 4:37pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 20th, 2004, 3:36am, THUDandBLUNDER wrote:| ...albeit unsuccessfully. |
|
I had already precisely defined the concept you were suggesting was not well-defined. If you have a problem with the definition, you should point it out (in that thread, of course)!
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
sheep
Newbie
yo yo yo. im radical, man...
Gender:
Posts: 17
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #21 on: Oct 10th, 2005, 8:56pm » |
Quote Modify
|
ive noticed that when daydreaming, i usually wander off topic...
well, i'd start with worrying for an exam or about forgetting my key but since i dont like to think about the consequences and the bad parts, i will usually magically find my key on my desk or manage to get inside by climbing a tree or something.
no one wants to think about the unpleasant so they avoid it.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Monkeysea Monkeydo
Guest
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #22 on: Nov 21st, 2005, 5:13pm » |
Quote Modify
 Remove
|
Never gave it much thought. Anybody ever wonder why we need to pass wind? Are we in some sort of race with wind? Who's win(?)ing?
Smile!
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
puzzlecracker
Senior Riddler
Men have become the tools of their tools
Gender:
Posts: 319
|
|
Define I
« Reply #23 on: Apr 30th, 2006, 10:33pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Topic: Who are we? define I?
Initially, I wanted to start a new topic, but found this thread as good start for the following TRUTH:
"I think therefore I am" - this classical statement allegedly stating existential properties of human nature. But I am concerned with the definitive ones. Let me elaborate with an example.
X encounter a random person Y. Through communication, actions, evens personal experiences, etc., X forms an opinion about person Y.
He states person Y is .... and ...!
The real questions are "What gives an X power to define Y?", "What criteria should X use to define why Y?" "Can Y be really be defined and how subjective can it be?"
In literature, there two conflicting metrics used to define a person.
a. based what a person does (did)
b. what person aspires , really wanted to do.
How should a person be define
|
|
IP Logged |
While we are postponing, life speeds by
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: we think therefore we are?
« Reply #24 on: May 1st, 2006, 12:38am » |
Quote Modify
|
There is also the social role a person fullfills. Environment is part of what defines a person. One can't be a mother without there being a child. One can't be teacher without there being students.
People are embedded entities.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
|
RIDDLES SITE
WRITE MATH!
Home 
Help 
Search 
Members 
Login 
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print