Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
r0ckyreed

To be is to be perceived = Esse est percipi

2 posts in this topic

I have been contemplating what existence is and remember reading Bishop Berkeley’s philosophy on idealism. His basic philosophy is that what existence means is that something is perceived. Without an object being perceived, how can it exist?

my inquiry goes like this:

What is the universe without life? Isn’t the point of creating life is so that the Universe can experience and become aware of itself? If there were no subjects in existence, then how could anything be known to exist? Before I was born, was there any sense of a Big Bang or a planet with human history and life? I find that the idea of the Holocaust, Big Bang, planet Earth all hinges upon subjectivity or life to exist. But more than that, it hinges on my perceptions and the idea of me to exist right? If I did not exist, what would the Universe be like? Would it exist at all? The world I am looking out at now seems like it is my own private universe that is limited by the perceptions of being human.
 

If I was to compare an alien with a different brain, a human being, a bat, and an ant, all of there Universes seem to be vastly different.

So does an object depend on me to exist? Is the Universe depended on the mind or independent. If it is independent, then what could we say exists? Can we say that the sun existed before us? Well it seems to me that we define the sun based off of our human perceptions of the sun. If the sun existed before I was born, could I assume that it would be just like how I perceive it now before I was born? In the same way, what is anything without a perceived? Can I assume that what I perceive now is exactly how the world is before I was born? I don’t think so because my perceptions are just a piece of the puzzle. It seems to me that my existence is like a piece to the puzzle, but yet, it also seems like the complete puzzle at the same time. The only thing I know is that which is based in my perception right? I mean I cannot know what the experience of a bat is like no matter how much I think about it. I can only know what’s in my direct experience. Other perspectives are what I am imagining based on my experiences. In fact, isn’t imagination and rationality dependent on the senses? If I cannot experience the world, how can I imagine it and rationalize it? 
 

So. This is my inquiry. It is probably full of shit, but I think Berkeley maybe on to something about Esse est percipi. It seems like the Big Bang never existed because it was not perceived. Though, I do struggle with the problem that there are many things that I do NOT perceive that seem to exist. For example, I could get sniper or hit by a car without perceiving it. Does the car or murderer exist? This is my problem with Esse est percipi, but it also seems that the world I perceive is the only world that exists at least to my perspective. It also seems that there is more to reality than what I perceive, but any notion of a different perception is something I am imagining right now?

What do you all think?

I am also pretty new to this work. I would love to hear your suggestions and perspectives.

Edited by r0ckyreed

“Our most valuable resource is not time, but rather it is consciousness itself. Consciousness is the basis for everything, and without it, there could be no time and no resource possible. It is only through consciousness and its cultivation that one’s passions, one’s focus, one’s curiosity, one’s time, and one’s capacity to love can be actualized and lived to the fullest.” - r0ckyreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After further contemplation, I came up with the conclusion that Berkeley had it backwards. Instead of to exist is to be perceived, I can up with the conclusion that to  be perceived is to exist.

in my contemplation, I made my room completely dark, I calmed my mind down, then I spun around to disorient myself and pick up a random object. With my eyes closed, I noticed that my mind immediately tried to conjure a visible image of the object, but I realize that I only have a visual thought of the object because it had been perceived before.  
 

I tried to ground myself in actuality and noticed that existence is subjective. A person born blind never experienced a visual reality. Therefore, a visual reality does not exist for him. I noticed that I do not actually perceive a visual image of the object I am holding (with eyes closed) I only feel the object. Without feeling or any other sensations, the object cannot be known to exist.

 

my problem with Berkeleys Esse est percipi is that it seems to me that objects that are NOT perceived can still affect me. I challenged this by reasoning that since I can perceive being affected, the affect and object exist, but this also had problems. One problem is being killed instantly by a car bomb. I didn’t perceive a bomb so it doesn’t exist (at least subjectively?).

 

this is why my conclusion to perceive means to exist. This means that perception is a facet of existence. I can only know what I can perceive through the senses, but there is more to reality than what my senses tell me. Therefore, To perceive is to exist

what does reality look like without being filtered through senses? Is there an absolute way for reality to look?

what do you all think?

Edited by r0ckyreed

“Our most valuable resource is not time, but rather it is consciousness itself. Consciousness is the basis for everything, and without it, there could be no time and no resource possible. It is only through consciousness and its cultivation that one’s passions, one’s focus, one’s curiosity, one’s time, and one’s capacity to love can be actualized and lived to the fullest.” - r0ckyreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0