Nothing exists outside of my consciousness

[Davino]

53 minutes ago, Reciprocality said:

You can in principle map all of existence

The map is not the territory and the map also exists, so you run into a regress problem, mapping the map if you map everything. And how can you map inifinity?

This is Kurt Gödel incompleteness theorem and proves that all attemps to conceptualize existence, at best, are a half Truth. 

[Reciprocality]

1 hour ago, Davino said:

The map is not the territory and the map also exists, so you run into a regress problem, mapping the map if you map everything. And how can you map inifinity?

This is Kurt Gödel incompleteness theorem and proves that all attemps to conceptualize existence, at best, are a half Truth. 

@Davino You do not need to map the map to map all of existence, you are assuming the infinity that you conclude with.

What you do need is something that is distinct from mappable things, and this must be without attributes, that which is "of existence" is not existence itself and it is existence itself that can not be mapped, not the things that are of it, and these can be in principle mapped completely, even though that which is identical to all these distinct properties is unmappable.

And if you reread my comment you may see that this is what I said.

The complete map is not of existence but instead purely an abstraction to us, that does not mean that it is not something that can happen in principle, I would even say that we are a part of it right now and that we are an infinitely small part at that but can i know?

If as you suggest the identity of all things without exception (being or isness) is one of the things that must be mapped for all of existence to be mapped then it would be correct that this is impossible, but I am saying that the impossibility of such a thing is a function of the contradiction between 1. a single subject being predicable by all predicates and 2. that same subject being predicable by non-predicates.

All of existence are the things that predicates the single subject, discernibility is a condition for predicates and therefore the single subject is not a predicate of itself. A complete set of maps of discernible things are possible because maps add nothing to the territory and are themselves indiscernible, the maps do not exist because the maps are of existence.

Our abstractions attempt to create discernibles in addition to those that already exists, but they can in fact only create discernibles by division of what already exists and the discernibles are therefore substantial. The set of them all may or may not be infinite.

 

The bolded above is Leibnizian rationalism (or any rationalism really), Godel has not refuted it in the slightest.

Our real object is to answer the question "how can we discern between 1. discernible things and 2. the thing which discerns between discernible things? in the first place", because we obviously can, and the answer is again contained in the discernible things that are not the thing which discerns.

That is, if there is anything discernible at all then a distinctness of "I" called ego is formed so that it can partake among those things, the indeterminate collection of all egos is unfalsifiable by logic and science and becomes a matter of faith.

Edited March 10 by Reciprocality

[Reciprocality]

So the conclusive remarks is that you do not exist, but you are that which you intended to talk about when you said that something could be of existence or reformulated: of existent things.

You have presupposed that there is something about you which is different from your experiences, and you literally have to do so to survive, this is the nature of purposivity, will and spontaneity.

Edit: the illusion is that the map could possibly contain attributes that are distinct from the territory, and if no such attribute is possible then you will have mapped all of existence without mapping the maps, the concept of mapping a map is what is self-refuting, the map of all maps is reducible to the map of all territory, existence is by virtue of mappable things so all existence is by virtue of all mappable things.

Edited March 10 by Reciprocality

[Breakingthewall]

The problem is the word conscience. If you are aware of this, you cannot also be aware of another experience at the same time. It is a misunderstanding because you are not aware of the experience, you are the substance of the experience, and this substance is infinite, therefore it can create infinite experiences, and in each one consciousness arises since what exists implies consciousness. reality is one, consciousness is separate

[Guest Bazooka Jesus]

On 8.3.2024 at 4:02 AM, Someone here said:

you see guys  ..the bottom line is that Solipsism can't be disproved. Not in a zillion years lol.

Solipsism is comically easy to disprove. You can do it using no more than five words... six if you want to get fancy about it:

(Absolute) Reality is not an -ism.

Nuff said.