philosophy and insanity
-
- Posts: 15580
- Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: somewhere, over the rainbow, and Ergoville, USA
philosophy and insanity
So...
I'm reading this book about the history of Western philosophy and I'm in love.
I'm 3/4 of the way through it, but I'm honestly unsure if I exist. I'd always assumed that I existed.
Nothing really seems real, and I'm unsure of how I feel, that's perfectly ok.
Anyway, I've been "sh*t crazy" (jim stone's term) before, and it's the exact feeling I have now. I figured this was a good place to ask - what's the difference between the two feelings?
I don't think there really is a difference. It's all in the people you tell. (Doesn't that sound mental?)
I'm reading this book about the history of Western philosophy and I'm in love.
I'm 3/4 of the way through it, but I'm honestly unsure if I exist. I'd always assumed that I existed.
Nothing really seems real, and I'm unsure of how I feel, that's perfectly ok.
Anyway, I've been "sh*t crazy" (jim stone's term) before, and it's the exact feeling I have now. I figured this was a good place to ask - what's the difference between the two feelings?
I don't think there really is a difference. It's all in the people you tell. (Doesn't that sound mental?)
- burnsbyrne
- Posts: 1345
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Cleveland, Ohio
- Kuranes
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 10:19 am
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: London, Ontario, Canada
You haven't gotten to Descartes, yet, have you? If you read, i think it was, Meditations, he proves to his own satisfaction that he exists.I'm 3/4 of the way through it, but I'm honestly unsure if I exist. I'd always assumed that I existed.
I'm sure it's online somewhere, I'll dig it up.
http://www.wright.edu/cola/descartes/
In Meditations II, he (at least, to himself) proves that he exists.
[ Note that there's a great deal of talk in his meditations about the existence or lack of existence of God -- keep in mind that Descartes was writing at the height of the witch craze, when publishing anything heretical was Not A Good Idea. To the point where he had to move to Holland to do his writing, as he would have probably been executed in France for his publications. So while there is a great deal of energy spent asserting the existence of God, it's not clear to me how much of that was honest and how much of it was CYA writing. ]
For when as children we listen and dream, we think but half-formed thoughts; and when as men we try to remember, we are dulled and prosaic with the poison of life.
- Wombat
- Posts: 7105
- Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 6:00 pm
- antispam: No
- Location: Probably Evanston, possibly Wollongong
Cran, the sceptical arguments you're reading are meant to be taken seriously, but not that seriously. It's a bit hard to explain if it doesn't just come naturally to you but I'll try.
It's not quite that you are supposed to take them in a detached rather than an engaged way. It's more like acting. While you're doing it, throw yourself into it wholeheartedly, but not so wholeheartedly that you carry on acting if the theatre is on fire. When the curtain falls, go back to whatever you were doing as though nothing had happened.
Almost nobody thinks that, if you don't have conclusive proof of your own existence, then it's irrational to believe that you exist. Most people simply use those arguments to soften you up for what they regard as a new and better explanation of how we know the ordinary things we take ourselves to know.
It's not quite that you are supposed to take them in a detached rather than an engaged way. It's more like acting. While you're doing it, throw yourself into it wholeheartedly, but not so wholeheartedly that you carry on acting if the theatre is on fire. When the curtain falls, go back to whatever you were doing as though nothing had happened.
Almost nobody thinks that, if you don't have conclusive proof of your own existence, then it's irrational to believe that you exist. Most people simply use those arguments to soften you up for what they regard as a new and better explanation of how we know the ordinary things we take ourselves to know.
-
- Posts: 15580
- Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: somewhere, over the rainbow, and Ergoville, USA
I completely understand that, Wombat. I can and am still carrying on normal life, lol.
But I'm left sort of...hmm...feeling rather insane. I'm pondering everything really deeply and I was just wondering how this feeling differs from psychosis, because in my experience the feelings similar, if not the same. For me at least. I wonder how they differ.
*For the time being, at least.
But I'm left sort of...hmm...feeling rather insane. I'm pondering everything really deeply and I was just wondering how this feeling differs from psychosis, because in my experience the feelings similar, if not the same. For me at least. I wonder how they differ.
I think that.* Does that make me crazy?Almost nobody thinks that, if you don't have conclusive proof of your own existence, then it's irrational to believe that you exist.
*For the time being, at least.
- Jerry Freeman
- Posts: 6074
- Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2002 6:00 pm
- antispam: No
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 8
- Location: Now playing in Northeastern Connecticut
- Contact:
I think it's safe to conclude that, if you can ask yourself whether you exist, then you exist.
The interesting thing, to me, is to wonder what it is that exists (called "me" or "Cranberry") and is asking such questions.
In other words, "WHAT am I?" as opposed to "Am I?" is the more interesting question as far as I'm concerned.
Best wishes,
Jerry
The interesting thing, to me, is to wonder what it is that exists (called "me" or "Cranberry") and is asking such questions.
In other words, "WHAT am I?" as opposed to "Am I?" is the more interesting question as far as I'm concerned.
Best wishes,
Jerry
- antstastegood
- Posts: 519
- Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 12:48 am
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Seabiscuit's stomping ground.
- Contact:
- Nanohedron
- Moderatorer
- Posts: 38239
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 6:00 pm
- antispam: No
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 8
- Tell us something.: Been a fluter, citternist, and uilleann piper; committed now to the way of the harp.
Oh, yeah: also a mod here, not a spammer. A matter of opinion, perhaps. - Location: Lefse country
Too late for that, Cran, old bean!Cranberry wrote:I'm not commenting further or I may start to look insane.
I agree with Jerry. Questions about the nature of reality will get you further than wrestling with a starkly absolutist "is/is not" view.
If you want to get into that, check out some Zen commentary. That'll make your head spin!
And you are absolutely right there as well.Cranberry wrote:I'm not sure I really agree with that. Mabey I need to work through some things.The fact that you ask yourself the question is a conclusive proof that you do exist.
I'm not commenting further or I may start to look insane.
The fact that a question is cannot prove anything. However if you said 'I do not exist' it is self contradictory since nothing can both assert and not be.
De Cartes final, and to him most cogent, arguement states ' if there is an evil demon which would decieve me ... that I am not' etc. He reiterates the proof many differnet ways and it is all the same in the end. You cannot truely assert that you are not, an evil demon cannot decieve you into not being for there MUST BE something that is decieved.... etc.
De Cartes was educated by Catholic Jesuit Priests and is the inventor of Co-ordinate Geometry - Sin Cos Tan and all that good stuff.
Last edited by Guest on Thu May 06, 2004 11:33 am, edited 5 times in total.
- Bloomfield
- Posts: 8225
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2001 6:00 pm
- antispam: No
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 8
- Location: Location: Location:
Also, you should realize that in philosophy there are a number of recognized fallacies (erroneos arguments if you will), that no one can refute yet no one believes in. The reason is that these fallacies are water-tight: you cannot prove them wrong. But that doesn't mean they are right, or should be taken seriously.
One of these fallacies is solipcism, which states that everything is just a figment of your mind. Nothing exists. You can't disprove solipcism because even its refutation is imaginary. (The reason this particular bit of madness is called solipcism is that the result of it is that each person is completely isolated, interacting with nothing but his/her own imagination, from solo=alone).
Another fallacy is assuming that one doesn't exist. It is also cute, because difficult or impossible to refute. But it's a bit of bummer if you think about it, because if I don't exist who was that getting so amazingly drunk at the Philological Society's annual reception last Thursday that I spilled my drink down Prof. Sibylle Cotwold's decolte and called old Prof. Werckenheimer's new book "a failed attempt at onanism" in his presence? Certain moments I just wouldn't want to miss, therefore it can't be true.
One of these fallacies is solipcism, which states that everything is just a figment of your mind. Nothing exists. You can't disprove solipcism because even its refutation is imaginary. (The reason this particular bit of madness is called solipcism is that the result of it is that each person is completely isolated, interacting with nothing but his/her own imagination, from solo=alone).
Another fallacy is assuming that one doesn't exist. It is also cute, because difficult or impossible to refute. But it's a bit of bummer if you think about it, because if I don't exist who was that getting so amazingly drunk at the Philological Society's annual reception last Thursday that I spilled my drink down Prof. Sibylle Cotwold's decolte and called old Prof. Werckenheimer's new book "a failed attempt at onanism" in his presence? Certain moments I just wouldn't want to miss, therefore it can't be true.
Last edited by Bloomfield on Wed May 05, 2004 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
/Bloomfield