What can you prove to exist outside of the bounds of your internal

I can't understand what you're saying and I don't much appreciate that image you used.

>>39014695
Cure mint and Cure dream are best

File: 4.png (21KB, 128x122px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 128x122px

>>39014695
I can prove the existance of the observable?

>>39014695
Well yeah. It's a purposeless truth though. If you existed as an nondescript being in a space with nothingness stretching forever, and you had virtual reality goggles in the middle of nowhere, what would you do then? Even more abstractly, if your entire world just happened to be a pseudoflat screen with quasi-three-dimensional senses, turn it off and where are you supposed to be anyway?
I suppose the purpose of eastern philosophy is to see this inherent nothingness. I guess western philosophy instead focuses on what you want to do after finding out.
I mean, clearly you're subscribing to solipsistic thought, but it's outwardly paradoxical and inwardly truthful. And it's useless, unless you know of some way to hack your conscious experience so you can control it in a semi-omnipotent fashion. Videogames are close, as you can engross yourself in them.

>>39014695
Regardless of the actual existence of the external, it is none the less perceived.

>>39014695
>cureMint
>Cure lemonade
>Cure Dream
>Cure Rouge
>Cure Aqua

Just what did the nips mean by this?

>>39015454
Precure is show for little girls

>>39014695
Nothing. But what I can prove is my own existence. I think, therefore I am.

>>39015484
now that doesn't explain anything

File: aristotle-plato.jpg (99KB, 580x296px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 580x296px

>>39014695
Through our senses we can precept patterns and constants that exist independent of the mind. For what purpose would there exit any need for systems of logic or mathematical / scientific concepts besides to determine the laws of reality? If solipsism were true there would be no need for order or logic seen on the scale that our universe provides us, if only our consciousness was the only thing that existed it could define the rules of it's existence to any length; change the laws of physics. But it cannot, it obeys the laws of this specific reality like any other object that fits inside our classical ontological framework.

>>39015512
*perceive

>>39015506
it's scat fetish porn featuring the women of a children's anime television show called PreCure

Why do girl make such big stinky poo poo xD

>>39015512
*For what purpose would there exits for systems of logic

fuck my brain

>>39014695
Math, I'd imagine.

>>39015512
How can you prove that our subconscious minds are not determining these rules for us? We may not have direct, concious control, but we could have unintentional control.

>>39015535
>tfw no pupu pipi loli gf

>>39015418
Drugs my senpai. Drugs..

>>39015447
Perception internally constructed

>>39015512
>Precept
Rules and regulations existing independently of thought? Which is by default subjective?

>>39015576
Math requires a mind

>>39014695
Clearly *something* must be there, otherwise you wouldn't be building a model of it, would you?

File: IMG_6525.jpg (225KB, 3000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 3000x3000px

For the retarded brainlet anons, OP is basicly saying, "Prove you don't live in a simulation and everything is a lie," without autistically saying that or implying we do live in a simulation.
For a nice refresher course, see >>/sci/9089889.

As for my answer,
Even if it is unfalsifiable and would indicate our lives don't matter/aren't real, we should still live as if they do in the off chance that you're wrong.
I honest to God cannot prove I am not living in a simulation and everything I know is a lie. But I can live a healthy life obtaining as much knowledge as I can and leading in what I believe to be is life's purpose, and if none of that matters, then none of that affects me anyways. But say I dedicate my life to believing I'm in a simulation, and I spend all of the time I have before I die trying to prove it or going on GTA style crime sprees because my actions don't have real consequences, and it turns out that I'm wrong and everything I did does indeed matter?

Don't let the fantasy of living in a simulation disrupt the living of a healthy lifestyle where your choices matter. Don't waste your life in the case that you do actually have one. I can't prove whether or not I'm in a simulation. But it's more beneficial to live as if I don't.
Case closed.

>>39016064
Btfo you got me but good point. What IS out there though? If you say supreme being, then isn't that being a subject of it's own? Nothing could exist beyond the perception of this supreme being. It's just a much larger version of our micro cosmic subjective experience

>>39016095
Aaand the reply-link is broken because the thread is old as fuck and archived, so have this internet link to take you to that thread.
>>>/sci/9093004

>>39014806
hehehehehehehehehehe i could not be more amused

>philosophy
>circle jerking smart but lazy 2deep4u fags

>>39016103
and here we see "btfo" and all it really was is a stupid word game with no real bearing on reality.

File: file.png (49KB, 1280x293px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 1280x293px

>>39016109
works for me here

>>39016103
Well, we won't know what exists outside of our perception, we can only comprehend it by some extension of our perception.

Trying to explain what the world is like without our sense would be like trying to explain what red is without using examples of objects, or trying to explain the experience of something sour. Even the most abstract ways of explaining the world (mathematics) relies on otherwise human symbolic reasoning.

It's ultimately a vacuous idea, because of those inherent problems, and because it doesn't alter at all how you interact with the world no matter what the answer is, kinda similar to the determinism vs free will debate

>>39016181
We will die one day. I don't know what to make of reality. I don't know what will come next at the end of my life, if anything. But it just seems significant that what we perceive as external is really an illusion to a significant degree. When we die what really happens to this inner universe we call Self?

>>39016282
If it makes you feel better, I figure that us existing is evidence that we can exist, and thus might exist again in the future.

I think the chance of this happening is pretty likely if the universe is deterministic, which it probably is. So, you know, you'll die and then you'll probably restart your life again whenever the universe happens to go about in the same way as it did up to your creation, and eventually end up back to this exact point, as you've done over and over and over, and will continue to do, over and over and over. Death truly is illusory.

>>39016364
I agree, I mean, the idea of there being nothing? On the off chance that there is a such thing as NOthing, its literally impossible to experience that. So I guess that would be ok? I won't commit suicide for the sake of my mom and family yet this world is a terrible place and the knowledge that life will end, allegedly speaking is a comfort. But if there is another side, I hope its nothing like the present reality