Evidence of Objectivity?
January 12, 2011 at 11:22 am
(This post was last modified: January 12, 2011 at 12:51 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
Whenever we have evidence of something that evidence always comes either directly from our experience or is indirectly induced from it. I have direct evidence of my own experience, and I can also induce - but I can't deduce it, hence why solipsism isn't disproven - from my experience that other individuals similar to me also experience things, but where is the evidence of anything actually existing besides subjectivity?
Well, I guess, since when someone is unconscious they still exist that's an example of objective existence without subjective experience. But is it? Their unconsciousness is still consciously experienced by others who observe their consciousness, so what if there were no conscious observers at all, what if there were no subjects, would there be any objects then? The subject really does exist subjectively to other subjects even when it itself is unconscious, but that's still a matter of subjectivity so is it really evidence that if there were no subjects there would still be objects (as in, objects separate to subjects)? Is there valid induction there or not?
We have experience of evidence around the world and the universe that indicate that things existed before human or non-human experience existed, but is that evidence also evidence for such a reality separate to our experience of that evidence itself, and if not how can we be sure anything existed before human or non-human experience?
It sounds an utterly absurd thing to question, but incredulity and absurdity are not rational reasons to disbelieve the possibility, they are merely intuitive ones. It may be absurd of us to question this matter, but is it really improbable for it to be true? I intuitively assume that there are probably rational reasons for why this is an absurd thing to question, but I can't think of what those reasons are. So, assuming that our intuition on the matter is correct, how is it?
Discuss.
Well, I guess, since when someone is unconscious they still exist that's an example of objective existence without subjective experience. But is it? Their unconsciousness is still consciously experienced by others who observe their consciousness, so what if there were no conscious observers at all, what if there were no subjects, would there be any objects then? The subject really does exist subjectively to other subjects even when it itself is unconscious, but that's still a matter of subjectivity so is it really evidence that if there were no subjects there would still be objects (as in, objects separate to subjects)? Is there valid induction there or not?
We have experience of evidence around the world and the universe that indicate that things existed before human or non-human experience existed, but is that evidence also evidence for such a reality separate to our experience of that evidence itself, and if not how can we be sure anything existed before human or non-human experience?
It sounds an utterly absurd thing to question, but incredulity and absurdity are not rational reasons to disbelieve the possibility, they are merely intuitive ones. It may be absurd of us to question this matter, but is it really improbable for it to be true? I intuitively assume that there are probably rational reasons for why this is an absurd thing to question, but I can't think of what those reasons are. So, assuming that our intuition on the matter is correct, how is it?
Discuss.
