Prove your existence.

[Cavouku]

I can prove the existence of myself, and anything that exists only due to its definition. For instance, justice exists, if only for the soul reason that its existence is merely based on the definition of justice. Justice would therefor be different for almost everyone, but because it exists within definition, it exists.

Easier example; shapes. A shape does not have to physically exist to be existing. A triangle is a three-sided figure (plus other specific jargon), a square has four equal sides, and you don't need to see a square drawn on the bathroom wall to quantify its existence.

I could technically say God exists, but only by the pantheistic, or panentheistic (those two are essentially the same thing) definition. Even if there's nothing else, at least I exist, and therefor if I'm everything, I am this form of God, because this form of God is described is everything. Or rather, God is me, if you're going with the panentheistic one. And it is also everything else that exists, whether or not it is physical.

Someone better stop me now, I'm having fun.

 

[Flip-Shying]

I post, therefore I am!

 

[Tsun Tzu]

No.

Not like it matters, honestly, every last one of these responses could be produced by your subconscious.

But seriously though, everyone's had this thought at one point in time or another. Personally had it a lot as a young lad.

I've moved on to nihilism. I've only got a few more isms to go before I get a free logy.

 

[Crazy]

How do I know you're not a figment of my imagination? Prove yourself!

 

[GoodGodItsAnOxymoron]

Je pense donc je suis - Cogito ergo sum

*I think therefore i am*

 

[zehydra]

In order to prove existence, we need a concrete definition of what it means to exist. This is the first step. If we can come up with a good, valid definition of "to exist", then we can see if we can prove your existence.

 

[orangeapples]

I can't... oh my god, my left hand is starting to dis

 

[Innegativeion]

I am experiencing myself as I type this, and therefor know my own existence firsthand, and therefor needn't prove anything to you, because experience is 100% accurate (disbarring experiences filtered through erroneous memory).

 

[Thaius]

Way I see it, if it can't be proved definitively one way or the other, it's not worth worrying about. I mean you could be convinced that I'm just a computer program, or a figment of your imagination, but regardless of that possibility, I am here talking to you one way or another. You can't prove either option, so just treat people like they actually exist and don't bother worrying about questions that couldn't possibly enrich your life in any way.

 

[LongLiveourMachine]

I think therefore I think exist

 

[Francis York Morgan]

Cogito Ergo Sum
I Think Therefore I Am-René Descartes

 

[sage42]

I post therefor I am, simply put if I didn't post to you I wouldn't exist in your mentality, just if you hadn't made the thread you wouldn't exist in mine.

EDIT: GODDAMN NINJA'S.I rage therefor I am.

 

[CODE-D]

You mean existence, there I proved mine by correcting you.
Couldn't do that if I didn't.

Unless he has a subconscious knowledge of the correct spelling, in which case his own mind is correcting him using you as a construct. Nothing proven.

That is like saying my subconscious doesn't have correct spelling knowledge and yet I spell fine. Doesn't make sense. Have we even proved the subconscious exists. Ive only ever been conscious and unconscious while maybe dreaming.

 

[Polarni]

Cognito ergo sum!

 

[Technetium]

Existence is amazing. I exist, you exist, everyone's happy. The end.

 

[Brown Cap]

You mean existence, there I proved mine by correcting you.
Couldn't do that if I didn't.

Yes you could; you could be a subconcious figment of his imagination, in which even if you know something he doesn't, (correcting him), it's still arguable.

 

[Guardian of Nekops]

Well, perhaps the most conclusive method of proof would, unfortunately, be no good to you.

The idea behind your argument is that the entire observed universe could exist only within your mind, and you wouldn't know the difference. This argument can be used by anyone, and if the existence of at least two observers could be verified then it falls flat... but there is no real way to do that without trusting the senses. However! There is one way to solve the connundrum from your point of view only, a bit of a Gordian Knot solution if you will. It's very simple.

I kill you.

At that point, if I keep existing and you stop thinking, then I have proved my existence. Unfortunately, I have done nothing to prove your existence to myself, and if you are still able to observe in any capacity (looking on from beyond the grave, etc) then the proof would do nothing... you could theoretically still be the only extant observer, still dreaming and only thinking you were dead due to my actions.

So basically, I could prove it, but I couldn't do so if you were still around to concede the argument. That would leave only my point of view, which would have learned nothing, and the numerous figments of my imagination that would quickly lock me up in a cell... perhaps one with padded walls... due to my own imagined concept of law. So let's not try it.

 

[CODE-D]

You mean existence, there I proved mine by correcting you.
Couldn't do that if I didn't.

Yes you could; you could be a subconcious figment of his imagination, in which even if you know something he doesn't, (correcting him), it's still arguable.

First give me proof that the subconscious exists.

 

[drisky]

I can only prove my own existence to myself, not to you. Feel free to think I stop existing when I don't make posts on the escapist and I shall do the same for you.

 

[DrOswald]

     
"I dreamed I was a butterfly, flitting around in the sky; then I awoke. Now I wonder: Am I a man who dreamt of being a butterfly, or am I a butterfly dreaming that I am a man?" -Chuang tzu-

I have decided you are all fragments of my imagination. Prove to me that you aren't. Prove to me you exist. I am easily persuaded .

(i am not looking for pictures ,names , numbers or anything of the like. How does one prove their existance or the existance of others?)

You are incapable of simply imagining up a system as self consistent and yet completely irrational as human society, let alone the entire physical universe. You just don't have the raw intelligence. No one individual could.

Unless you're God.