Post by permutojoe on Dec 4, 2021 21:41:51 GMT
First of all, cogito. It's not all inclusive. A lot of life doesn't think but appears to be. Not that it negates what Descartes was saying but could this be improved upon, to something like "I perceive therefore I am". And what about trees and insects. They don't think and probably don't experience things (or do they?).
Second, what does "I am" mean. One thing physicists love to talk about are fundamental vs emergent things in the universe. We know the Dallas Cowboys is a football team that is not a fundamental but an emergent thing in the universe. What if us people are also (hint: we probably are per current physics theories).
Third, let's look at Eastern philosophy's idea that the universe is one thing. The one thing that's non-dual is, well, everything. So does Descartes really exist as a separate entity in this worldview? Was he completely wrong or is it all just a matter of what level of the universe you're looking at? An Einsteinium frame of reference.
Seems like multiple problems here. Feel free to chime in on whatever. Also I'm a bit tipsy so sorry if any of this is wrongheaded or worded poorly.
Second, what does "I am" mean. One thing physicists love to talk about are fundamental vs emergent things in the universe. We know the Dallas Cowboys is a football team that is not a fundamental but an emergent thing in the universe. What if us people are also (hint: we probably are per current physics theories).
Third, let's look at Eastern philosophy's idea that the universe is one thing. The one thing that's non-dual is, well, everything. So does Descartes really exist as a separate entity in this worldview? Was he completely wrong or is it all just a matter of what level of the universe you're looking at? An Einsteinium frame of reference.
Seems like multiple problems here. Feel free to chime in on whatever. Also I'm a bit tipsy so sorry if any of this is wrongheaded or worded poorly.
