Theory of Universal Illusion
0
Girlfountain... when I read your post I thought I would marry you if you weren't a dude :D
Thank you. I had been thinking the same thing. But I also disagree. The first post was about this theory to some extent but the discussion turned more into discussion of existence in general.
But everyone, if you haven't read Plato's Theory of forms", read it. You get more to think about.
Ah.... after skimming a bit on your 'theories' i think they aren't theories or hypotheses.
i think they're just stuff that came out of your imagination. it's interesting. but pretty exotic, too.
This is not nonsense, you know...this is philosophy.
Any kind of world we can imagine might as well be true since we can't be sure about anything we perceive and thus are completely relying on assumptions anyway. For this reason many of these "worlds" described here seem logical and possible when you think about them. This also means that the world might not be as simple as it seems or it might be the simplest thing there is. We are part of this world and have limited observation and data processing abilities. And this is exactly what is called "subjective view", we are part of it so it's hard to analyse it.
BTW I would also want to note that there can be no such a thing as logic since we can't be sure about the relationships of the things.
I also myself think that being "certain" is not possible and thus not important but having an open attitude is fatal.
frodomir14 wrote...
Ok everybody before we get excited n stuff, I think what the OP meant was Plato's theory of forms, with certain logical paradoxes added to it, so no it's not really exotic, just nobody on fakku studied philo.... I mean nobody here has heard of it maybe...............Thank you. I had been thinking the same thing. But I also disagree. The first post was about this theory to some extent but the discussion turned more into discussion of existence in general.
But everyone, if you haven't read Plato's Theory of forms", read it. You get more to think about.
Bluegameroyon wrote...
This seems more like a hypothesis than a theory.Ah.... after skimming a bit on your 'theories' i think they aren't theories or hypotheses.
i think they're just stuff that came out of your imagination. it's interesting. but pretty exotic, too.
This is not nonsense, you know...this is philosophy.
Any kind of world we can imagine might as well be true since we can't be sure about anything we perceive and thus are completely relying on assumptions anyway. For this reason many of these "worlds" described here seem logical and possible when you think about them. This also means that the world might not be as simple as it seems or it might be the simplest thing there is. We are part of this world and have limited observation and data processing abilities. And this is exactly what is called "subjective view", we are part of it so it's hard to analyse it.
BTW I would also want to note that there can be no such a thing as logic since we can't be sure about the relationships of the things.
I also myself think that being "certain" is not possible and thus not important but having an open attitude is fatal.
0
[z]NOFUTURE's rep score is amazing
OT: basically I should of had the title changed or something because I agree this is more of an idea, the only reason that I put theory is that it would be more attractive to read about.
OT: basically I should of had the title changed or something because I agree this is more of an idea, the only reason that I put theory is that it would be more attractive to read about.
0
these theory threadss keep coming back, are you not happy with your life.
OT, if this is really an illusion, there's nothing you can do to escape it, so enjoy it
OT, if this is really an illusion, there's nothing you can do to escape it, so enjoy it
0
Jericho Antares
FAKKU Writer
Proof aside, what did you even encounter that would lead to this hypothesis (or would lead Plato for that matter)?
It seems to me that the only thing holding the whole deal up is the crutch of individual perception. Hell, you even use the term "illusion" which suggests that the constructs within these bubble universes only exist in our minds.
Firstly that means we're the only true living entity in the infinitely expanding universe (of which according to this would be billions upon billions of one-organism universes).
Secondly, if everyone else is an illusion then that means everything made by other people is an illusion, including the food in your pantry. I know the whole mind over matter argument, but if we've all been eating illusionary food our whole lives no amount of mental work can get over the fact that your body is not actually converting anything into energy.
EDIT: I'm not trying to dis-prove, but expound the theory.
It seems to me that the only thing holding the whole deal up is the crutch of individual perception. Hell, you even use the term "illusion" which suggests that the constructs within these bubble universes only exist in our minds.
Firstly that means we're the only true living entity in the infinitely expanding universe (of which according to this would be billions upon billions of one-organism universes).
Secondly, if everyone else is an illusion then that means everything made by other people is an illusion, including the food in your pantry. I know the whole mind over matter argument, but if we've all been eating illusionary food our whole lives no amount of mental work can get over the fact that your body is not actually converting anything into energy.
EDIT: I'm not trying to dis-prove, but expound the theory.
0
Never before have I wanted to try to kill myself just to see what happens so much. This plus what some one I know told me has got me thinking about death and what happens and all that stuff so much, that if you really think about it theres only one way to find out and that to...well die or in this case try to.
0
...WHAT.
Ummm this is some pretty heavy stuff. So what you're saying is that we all live in our own universe, and that everyone and everything is just like ummm a copy of something from someones universe, and that we can never die, but there would have to be a way for people to interact with the other universes, or else nothing would ever exist and the whole world would just be empty. Also if your whole world in constructed from the time you are born, and you're the only one in the universe, wouldn't that make you god of that world and you could shape it to whatever you want. Also if people can reproduce then they have to be able to create more universes, and then shouldn't all the people who are "dead" be somehow able to interact with the other universes. GOD THIS IS SO CONFUSING, someone should totally write a novel about this.
Ummm this is some pretty heavy stuff. So what you're saying is that we all live in our own universe, and that everyone and everything is just like ummm a copy of something from someones universe, and that we can never die, but there would have to be a way for people to interact with the other universes, or else nothing would ever exist and the whole world would just be empty. Also if your whole world in constructed from the time you are born, and you're the only one in the universe, wouldn't that make you god of that world and you could shape it to whatever you want. Also if people can reproduce then they have to be able to create more universes, and then shouldn't all the people who are "dead" be somehow able to interact with the other universes. GOD THIS IS SO CONFUSING, someone should totally write a novel about this.
0
This is the exact situation for which Occam's Razor was devised. Basically, it is impossible to factually distinguish two hypotheses which both explain perceived events. OP, your idea (as far as I can tell without thinking too hard) doesn't contradict reality and also has a very convenient "event horizon" (as in black holes) which prevents anyone who was an illusion and died from informing others in that world of his death. However, it has several complexity factors which, while not disproving the theory, do require more "hidden variables":
Occam's Razor states that between accepting these extraneous (in the sense that the universe could also exist without them) axioms/mechanisms, and not accepting them, the simplest choice, their denial, is most likely correct; some would say "necessarily correct". Therefore your situation, while interesting, thought-provoking, and probably consistent, is rather wrong.
EDIT: Anyone want to help me with my list?
[*]The universe (multiverse?) must be able to distinguish between human matter and non-human matter (or 'living' and 'non-living' respectively, if you claim that this holds true also for animals).
[*]Continuing with the above, the universe must be able to assign a time of transition between the two types of matter. This, as the ongoing debate on abortion proves, is not trivial.
[*]The theory denies determinism, another topic which is non-trivial and (as far as we know) independent of the current laws of the universe.
Occam's Razor states that between accepting these extraneous (in the sense that the universe could also exist without them) axioms/mechanisms, and not accepting them, the simplest choice, their denial, is most likely correct; some would say "necessarily correct". Therefore your situation, while interesting, thought-provoking, and probably consistent, is rather wrong.
EDIT: Anyone want to help me with my list?