(September 18, 2015 at 12:36 am)Rational AKD Wrote:Again this isn't even false, its worse in that it is meaningless. What is a "functionally real" but not "objectively real" world. The world is real or it is not. You cannot place an adjective in front of it to describe what type of real it is. To say you do not live in an objectively real world, is to say you live in a fantasy world, whether you created or someone else did.(September 18, 2015 at 12:16 am)Cato Wrote: This entire argument is bullshit. If an idealist was truly convinced, he would voluntarily separate his head from his neck and be able to gloat afterwards that he was right. The fact that none have nor will is all we need to understand about the confidence in their position.confusing idealism with solipsism... the world we experience is functionally real, which is to say it operates on its own consistently and we don't determine these operations... but that doesn't mean it's objectively real containing a material substance that is independent of our experiences and perceptions. it can still be just a mental construct without being constructed from your mind.
The warp speed backpeddling and excuse making to avoid a very simple demonstration may now commence.
and did you say very simple demonstration? tell me how I can demonstrate to you with empirical evidence you can only observe with your senses, what is behind those senses? we can only perceive the world through the lens of our senses, thus we cannot demonstrate using evidence from the world what is behind those senses. so what exactly is this 'simple demonstration' you're referring to?
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.
