What is being conveyed when we say "x exists"?

[MrTouchdown]

@thisintegrated That's like saying I don't exist because you can't see me. I don't understand why people think what they perceive is all that exists. 

[Kksd74628]

@MrTouchdown 

No, I am saying that all you perceive is all there is. There is nothing else than that and you can have an awakening to that and you may ask Leo, if for some reason you wouldn't take my words for it. You are doing radical mistake over here. You assume that I am real having an experience and after that you think that I say that what I experience is all that there is and then you prove that wrong for yourself using your experience. What I am saying is that you are the only conscious being and your experience is all that there is. It works exactly like a dream; there is only that which is dreamed.

Edited May 5, 2022 by Kksd74628

[thisintegrated]

3 minutes ago, MrTouchdown said:

@thisintegrated That's like saying I don't exist because you can't see me. I don't understand why people think what they perceive is all that exists. 

You haven't answered the question.  In what form do my cells exist if they don't exist in any form?

[Shambhu]

@MrTouchdown

47 minutes ago, MrTouchdown said:

@Shambhu perhaps "to stand out" also works? Or to have an impact? Or to affect?

The word "object" means to stand against; it is the correlate of consciousness.  Now, I did choose my words carefully, so I'm going to abide by my definition :-)

I think you can see that you are opening a can of worms here lol.  I can already sense that the conversation is moving toward the problem of other minds.  Did I mention that this wasn't an easy question? ;-)

Here are some notes from my personal inquiry (inspired by Spinoza) on this very subject.  Its from several years back, so my thought has evolved somewhat, but I'll just paste them here in their raw form and let it potentially be food for thought.

The essence of a thing is what it is to be that thing.
Whatever belongs to the essence of a thing is necessarily so for that thing (to be conceived).
If existence does not belong to the essence of that thing, that thing can be conceived as not existing.
If existence does belong to the essence of a thing, then its existence cannot be doubted.
If something exists it can be known. (side note - it must be logical to be known)
If something is known it must necessarily exist. (knowledge needs defining)
If something does not have existence as a part of its essence, 
    any instantiation of that thing must be in something that does have existence as part of its essence. (very subtle point)
If something is in something else or is conceived through something else it is a mode (or modification).
All doubtful things are modes. (need to show that modes do not have existence as part of their essence)
    Doubtful things do not exist.  Doubtful things are not known. (needs working out).

[lmfao]

@MrTouchdown read the first link I posted in your other thread, non-existence and nothingness are the same thing.

It's up to you to decide or figure out what you think "exist" means. It's a primary word or thing of which there is no other likeness to compare it to since existence is seemingly all there is. I could maybe say "exist" means "to be" but that's just more descriptions. It could mean "X is so" or "X is true"

People can equate "truth" with "what exists". "A is true" also means "A is so", "A exists". 

2 hours ago, MrTouchdown said:

We say that things "exist" or "are"

I can't determine what is being conveyed by that claim quite frankly. Any ideas?

It's in the domain of common sense to most people, what exist means. So you're questioning that common sense? If you're questioning that common sense, you must have more thoughts to say on the matter or some confusion/not-knowing which can be more precisely articulated

Edited May 5, 2022 by lmfao

[MrTouchdown]

 

2 hours ago, Kksd74628 said:

@MrTouchdown 

No, I am saying that all you perceive is all there is. There is nothing else than that and you can have an awakening to that and you may ask Leo, if for some reason you wouldn't take my words for it. You are doing radical mistake over here. You assume that I am real having an experience and after that you think that I say that what I experience is all that there is and then you prove that wrong for yourself using your experience. What I am saying is that you are the only conscious being and your experience is all that there is. It works exactly like a dream; there is only that which is dreamed.

How do you know that there isn't more than what you perceive since you can only know what you perceive?

[WelcometoReality]

5 hours ago, MrTouchdown said:

 

How do you know that there isn't more than what you perceive since you can only know what you perceive?

And how do you know there is more than what you perceive since you only know what you perceive?

I'm not saying that there is or isn't more. Just that it is unknown.

[Karas]

@Kksd74628Are you sure

[Kksd74628]

@Karas

y