You must log in or register to comment.
The worst part of this comic is that philosophy bro is clearly not even very good at his field, since there’s a much better Cartesian parallel to be made here (and I’m not even a philosopher).
“I think, therefore I am” is actually leaving out (imo) the most important part of Descartes’s argument. He was trying to find literally anything that he could know without a doubt was true. The problem is, that’s really hard, as our existence-troubled shopper has discovered. Descartes could doubt the existence of God, he could doubt the existence of goodness, of truth. All of these things might not actually exist. Descartes could even doubt his own existence.
In fact, literally the only thing Descartes could conclude without a doubt was true was the fact that he was doubting at all. So, since that’s the only thing he could be sure of, that’s what he built his argument for rationalism upon.
This perfectly mirrors the existential crisis the so-called philosopher comes upon, but instead of starting the shopper right where Descartes started, he instead just provides what must seem like almost a non sequitur in context, since if the man is currently doubting his existence, he can also doubt that he’s thinking. What he cannot doubt, is that he is in fact doubting.
“I doubt. Therefore, I think. I think, therefore I am.”
But what if you’re just imagining or dreaming that you’re doubting…? How do you even know you are the thing that’s doubting…? “You” could be a spurious Boltzmann brain, randomly manifested out of quantic chaos, in a state resembling that of a person doubting their own existence, for a mere Planck instant before dissolving back into the chaos from whence you emerged…
Guys stop. “Doubt” is starting to look funny
In the grand scheme of things, a human lifespan is in the same ballpark as a Planck instant when considering an infinite universe. That doesn’t mean either are insignificant in their own context though.
Time can be infinitely subdivided For all we know, billions of entire universes could be created and destroyed within ours in an instant. Our own universe could be as insignificant as an atom in some higher level universe. We can’t know that. But what I do know, is that I exist in this moment, and that’s enough for me.
Slightly related is the anthropic principle, or the “observation selection effect”, which is nicely summarized by this analogy:
This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, ‘This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!’ This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything’s going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.
- Douglas Adams, The Salmon of Doubt
The takeaway I get from this is that it’s important to appreciate the time we have, since everything comes to an end eventually.
Removed by mod
Yes, all you know is that something exists. And for the sake of argument, we call that ‘you’.
I could be any of these things, but I would still be
I couldn’t have said it better
Yeah I was gonna make a similar argument.
The proof of one’s existence is only that they percieve it enough to question it. Unfortunately, all of our sensory data is unreliable proof and therefor we cannot prove there is anything other than our own conciousness. Maybe you’re a mad god trapped in an eternal nightmare of your own design, have fun with that concept.
Dude’s insane. Cats don’t fucking talk.
Descartes was not right, most people do not think and yet they exist unfortunately.
Actually the negation of that implication would be: “I think, and I don’t exist”, and not “I don’t think, therefore I don’t exist”.
I’m just here to argue.
Oh! Oh. I’m sorry! This is abuse. No, you want twelve. Next door.
Don’t tell me what I want, and don’t tell me you’re sorry. Do you think I actually came here to abuse people? Do you think I’m that fucked up? Are you trying to tell me what to think? I know what happens next door, and you’re not going to get me involved with that weird sick shit that you’re clearly involved with. Maybe that would fly with your other friends, but it’s not going to here. Why don’t you just take your weird sicko bullshit next door and tell them about my abuse huh? Yak it up with all your sick ignorant friends, and pat each other on the back while crying abuse. I’m sure you’ll all have a really fucking nice time. Really. Go ahead and have a good time. Is that what you want to hear? Because if I say anything otherwise I’m the fucking asshole right? Well fuck you. I’m done. Got it? I’m done.
I won’t argue with you till you put some pants on.
I’ll consider it when you give me a better option than to call you moron.
I won’t argue with you; I am unequivocally a moron.
According to the thought experiment of Schrödinger’s cat, the animal can’t talk but also can speak.
Removed by mod
And then we’re surprised fascism is rising…
Reality is fake.
I saw a youtube title calling philosophers a bunch of white guys jerking each other off and I have never heard a more apt description since. Hell, even legendary philosopher Karl Marx made a fuck ton of mistakes until he actually went out in the real world and put his ideas to test; what hope do you think someone who literally sits around thinking about pointless “what-ifs” with them and their debate bros has?
If you ignore all the philosophers who weren’t white I guess.
Buddha, Confucius, Jesus: were nonwhite and such notable philosophers they each founded a religion based on their teachings
You: I’m gonna pretend I didn’t see that
The closest thing white people have to anything on the level of those three is Alistair Crowley, and you’ve probably never heard of him.
We calling philosophy a science now? And the other comment is bringing it even further unrelated into art degrees…
Philosophy and science have historically always been intertwined. Many, MANY famous scientists were also philosophers, going all the way back to ancient times.
Without philosophy we literally would not have the scientific method.
Well, what do you think Ph.D. stands for? Philosophiae Doctor.
Philosophy isn’t a science. Science is a philosophy. What do you think PhD stands for?
Philosophy is the soil from which science has always sprouted. Without philosophy, much of modern society would not come about.
