Are we alive?

I'd like to have consensual sex with her, if you know what I mean. Also yes, except when we're dead.

File: 1446429642635.jpg (64KB, 429x720px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 429x720px

>>471268

File: Kourtney_Kardashia_1772596a.jpg (84KB, 620x833px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 620x833px

Are we real?

>pic not related but ironically so

File: everything-is-nothing.jpg (27KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 512x512px

the universe is alive, and springs eternally from nothingness. stop worrying about shit.

>>471268
Our cells are currently undergoing their vital metabolic functions unassisted, so I'd say that we are indeed "living" by standard definitions.

Yes because we think

>>471268
I am, I don't know about you.

>>471769
that just means we exist, life is another matter entirely.

>>471777
my series of numbers confirms.

excelsior

>>471268
Check your pulse to confirm.

File: tumblr_inline_nhd28vF2Na1qatzm4.jpg (47KB, 300x219px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 300x219px

COGITO
ERGO
SUM

>>471268
Why dont you try jumping of a very tall building ...then come back and tell us If in fact you are ALIVE

>>471824
One of my school acquaintances recently jumped off a tall supermarket. Broke both her legs but she is still alive.

yeesterday ia realised that, everything we can calltrue, we can't call true

like, your example: are we alive? well, even if you have a pulse>>471801 you might be a brain in a jar and the pulse might be your imaination ,and as life is pointless (nihilism) ... itr doesn't matter either way

>>471848
Isn't what we call true entirely dependent on our assumptions, i.e., our a priori knowledge?

I shared your view that we can assume nothing for a very long time, but I got bored of not being able to come to any conclusions. From this point, Anon, you can either make presumptions (assuming assumptions for the sake of argument), or you can try to look for objective assumptions like Russell.

>>471836
When the people around you are trying to kill themselves it can mess with your head. Stay strong senpai.

>>471862
>>471848
If you are interested in your current problem, you should consider studying formal and symbolic logic. You may not come to satisfactory conclusions, but it will be time well-spent for someone in your position.

File: 1426629719315.jpg (14KB, 325x427px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 325x427px

>>471268
>Are we alive?
We don't know, for all we know we could be a part of simulation. But does that mean that only because we're in a simulation we're not human and alive? Many think that AI are not 'real', right? How would we view ourselves if we knew we were part of a simulation going on in someone's computer? How would our worldview look like if big bang happened because whoever started the simulation created this all with the big bang? What if the parallel universe theory turns out to rather be parallel simulations running alongside each other? Would we call the simulator a "god"? Can he really be viewed as a god since we now know how the one in control does things? Or would we cast this off as lunacy and just be about our day because dealing with the fact that we're not actually "real" is too harsh?


Just kidding I don't know what the fuck I'm on about.

Since everything you percieve is inside your own mind, you have no way of knowing. If by "dead" you mean not in contact with the outside world, that could also be true, since you are only connected to it through your senses and we know we cannot trust them completely.

>>471268
Probably not.

Define 'are'

you might as well kill yourself, you are already dead