RE: Justification for Foundational Belief
July 27, 2012 at 1:36 pm
(This post was last modified: July 27, 2012 at 1:49 pm by genkaus.)
(July 27, 2012 at 10:22 am)Rhythm Wrote: We should constantly question those principles regardless of what reality we may find ourselves in -don't you think?
It is questioning for the sake of questioning that I object to. You have to realize that whatever questions, doubts or objections you raise - they too rely on certain foundational principles. And if those rely on the same foundational principles they address, then they are undercutting their own validity. So, before questioning the foundational beliefs, we must ask ourselves 1) do the questions make sense without those beliefs and 2) can they be derived form any other set of foundational beliefs.
(July 27, 2012 at 10:22 am)Rhythm Wrote: Why, btw, are we assuming that a self generated reality would be so easily subject to change? How adept are you at exploiting and controlling your dreams (since that example was used)? Do you find that your dreamscape diverges from the waking world in fundamental ways more often than it conforms to it?
Most of my views on the subject are based on my own experiences and a cursory research.
1. There is a concept called lucid dreaming in which the dreamer is aware of the fact that he is in a dream and therefore able to exert some control over the reality of that dream. If solipsism was true, i.e. reality was self-generated, then by the very acceptance of that philosophy one would become aware of it and thus be able to exert some control over the waking reality. So, unless anyone believes the claims of "min-over-matter" hermits or psychics - that does not happen.
2. While I myself have never had a lucid dream, focusing my thoughts on a certain narrative often has a desired effect on my dreams. For example, I often go to sleep imagining myself as a character in my favorite movies or tv-shows and I often find that my dreams continue form there on with a marginally consistent narrative. Another example would be when I wake up from a nightmare, I go back to sleep focusing on the last few details I can remember and imagining all the ways it can play out to my benefit. That usually allows me to actually bring the dream to a satisfactory conclusion.
3. Yes, my dreamscape can diverge from waking reality in many fundamental ways. Once I dreamed that I was a math equation trying to solve itself. (Why yes, that was the night before my math finals. ow did you know?)
4. The clincher for me is the fact that I never seem to even think about all the existential questions we are asking here in a dream. Right here and now, I am capable of asking these question - "am I dreaming?", "am I really here?", "does what is happening make any sense?" and so on. In a dream, I seem to accept everything at face-value without critically examining it. It is my belief that the moment I start asking the same questions in my dreams, I would become capable of lucid dreaming.
On a side not, have you ever tried to determine how many of your senses are active during your dreams? Sight and hearing are a given. Touch seems pretty obvious as well. I have been able to verify that I can taste in my dreams as well. Smell I have never been able to establish. There is also thermoception and acceleroception which - combined - give a pretty believable sensation of flying. For me atleast, nociception is out - the moment I feel pain is the moment I wake up.
(July 27, 2012 at 10:22 am)Rhythm Wrote: (also, since we're invoking solipsism, and of all thing, the matrix..hehehehe..-which of your two worlds is the dreamscape, and which the waking reality? How would you determine this?)
Like I said, the primary argument in support of solipsism is the dream argument, which can reasonably discounted - though not completely refuted - based on the arguments above. The matrix argument is much harder to beat. The only foolproof test for it would be to wait for Neo.
