(January 9, 2013 at 6:36 pm)Rhythm Wrote:(January 9, 2013 at 6:29 pm)Creed of Heresy Wrote: Wait wha?IOW creed, I can concede the first and still not accept anything on faith. I don't have to believe that I;m real, I can suspect greatly that I am an illusion (though I'd argue that in this case the illusion is -precisely- what I am), or I can simply avoid thinking about it entirely. None of that will interfere with the act of being me, and none of it requires that I pick up any faith.
Oh. Sorry, I had a brainfart when I was reading your post, something didn't translate well to my brain in it.
I see what you mean, it's just...how DOES one convince someone that thinks that the argument that the five senses are not enough to be definitive proof of one's own existence that, in fact, it is all that you have and all that is needed? If you can at all? And is it valid to think that way? Or is it just idiocy masquerading as deep thought that rejects any semblance of tangibility in favor of arguing the inarguable? Take a guess which one I think it is. My concern is just, am I biased? SHOULD I be considering this viewpoint as valid, or...is common sense just working in my favor on this one?