Are there any studies that prove we exist?

[desslok]

I know there are a lot of people in this science based section of the forums who don’t believe what they see and experience unless there is a study that backs their observations. So was hoping someone had a study that proved that we exist. My friend is trying to tell me that we don’t actually exist and I am telling him that we do, so just need to point to a peer reviewed study to prove to him that we do exist. thanks in advance!

[adamsz]

this man would like a word

[401Delta]

The only conclusive test that I know of is the one where you try to look at your own butthole without a mirror.

[TolerantLactose]

The only conclusive test that I know of is the one where you try to look at your own butthole without a mirror.

That only proves you exhaust.

[EliKoehn]

I think that's a bit of a low-blow, since epistemology is inherently a priori in a way that sports science is not; moreover a lot of the quest for and discussion of minutiae in studies seems to stem mostly from an enthusiasm or general interest, rather than an intent to upend universally accepted conclusions and their bearing on our daily life, even as people more conscious of and concerned with these factors in the first place.

EDIT: I do find it ironic though that Descartes is the direct genesis of these planar graphs which feature so heavily in references to said studies.

[LtGoose]

I think that's a bit of a low-blow, since epistemology is inherently a priori

Or you know, you could choose not to fall into the infinite regression trap and instead accept a standard so discourse can occur.

There are hierarchies to philosophy for a reason.

[EiFit91]

I know there are a lot of people in this science based section of the forums who don’t believe what they see and experience unless there is a study that backs their observations. So was hoping someone had a study that proved that we exist. My friend is trying to tell me that we don’t actually exist and I am telling him that we do, so just need to point to a peer reviewed study to prove to him that we do exist. thanks in advance!

Lol

Like Eli alluded to Descartes (Cogito Ergo Sum - I think, therefore I am) is the most well known argument

I personally don’t find this kind of philosophy very useful. One of the great american philosophers, Charles Sanders Peirce, said something like «do not doubt in your mind what you cannot doubt in your heart», meaning that we always have to start with some basic presuppositions, so pretending to doubt everything will necessarily lead you to leave something out. The most basic assumptions that you really take for granted will still slip through your arguments.

A good example is that Descartes tries to start from radical doubt - i.e. his method is to basically doubt everything and then start from scratch - but he doesn’t doubt the subject-predicate logic (I, the subject, is doing the thinking) which he inherits from previous thinkers...

Your friend does the same thing, just say «if we don’t exist, why are you talking to me?»

[EliKoehn]

Or you know, you could choose not to fall into the infinite regression trap and instead accept a standard so discourse can occur.

There are hierarchies to philosophy for a reason.

Ah, so we have to be empiricists by default? Kantian a priori axiomatic pure reason is such a standard, by the way, if you've read Kant.

[AdamWW]

I’m more curious if existing increases TDEE compared to not existing

[401Delta]

That only proves you exhaust.

I exhaust therefore I exist.

[EiFit91]

i’m more curious if existing increases tdee compared to not existing

lmao

[paulinkansas]

if you've read Kant.

I Kant say I have.

[EiFit91]

I Kant say I have.

You Kant be serious?

I am doubting if this «friend» is real or if desslok just made him up

[Strawng]

I’m more curious if existing increases TDEE compared to not existing

LMAO I was hoping someone was gonna say this!! XD

[EiFit91]

LMAO I was hoping someone was gonna say this!! XD

A corpse cannot possibly downregulate its NEAT

Thus not existing increases TDEE

[LtGoose]

Ah, so we have to be empiricists by default? Kantian a priori axiomatic pure reason is such a standard, by the way, if you've read Kant.

Only if you want meaningful discussion to happen. I don't see how debating what is "knowable" or what "existence" is progresses human thought forward. There will never be a consensus.

While moralists can argue about what a "virtuous" life looks like because they already presupposed that "virtue" exists.

Spoiler!

in b4 we digress into semantics

[paulinkansas]

[QUOTE=EiFit91;1645558303]A corpse cannot possibly downregulate its NEAT
[/QUOT]

But there will be an increase in entropy.

[EiFit91]

Only if you want meaningful discussion to happen. I don't see how debating what is "knowable" or what "existence" is progresses human thought forward. There will never be a consensus.

While moralists can argue about what a "virtuous" life looks like because it's already presupposed that "virtue" exists.

Spoiler!

in b4 we digress into semantics

Please provide empirical evidence backing those statements

[EiFit91]

[QUOTE=paulinkansas;1645559043]

A corpse cannot possibly downregulate its NEAT
[/QUOT]

But there will be an increase in entropy.

But Jordan Feigenbaum said «entropy doesn’t really affect your TDEE»

[LtGoose]

Please provide empirical evidence backing those statements

Spoiler!

[EliKoehn]

Only if you want meaningful discussion to happen. I don't see how debating what is "knowable" or what "existence" is progresses human thought forward. There will never be a consensus.

While moralists can argue about what a "virtuous" life looks like because it's already presupposed that "virtue" exists.

Spoiler!

in b4 we digress into semantics

Also, respectfully your implicit notions of "progress" and "forward" are at least as assumptive as "knowable" or "existence."

[AdamWW]

Slightly related and fascinating topic (IMO)...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)

"In physics, the observer effect is the disturbance of an observed system by the act of observation.[1][2] This is often the result of instruments that, by necessity, alter the state of what they measure in some manner. A common example is checking the pressure in an automobile tire; this is difficult to do without letting out some of the air, thus changing the pressure. Similarly, it is not possible to see any object without light hitting the object, and causing it to reflect that light. While the effects of observation are often negligible, the object still experiences a change."



So in essence, any kind of perception we have of any kind of matter immediately impacts it in some way, simply by knowing it is there.

Sound waves have to bounce off something to hear it... that effects the matter

Light has to reflect for us to see it or instruments to pick it up... that effects the matter

And of course touching something will alter it.



So as soon as matter of any kind of becomes perceptible, it is altered in some way.... pretty interesting to think of.

I've often found it fascinating that human being cannot truly experience any in our natural universe when it actually happens, due to our brains requiring some minute amount of time to processing before we can respond.

Everything you see, hear, touch... it already happened before you knew it did.

[EiFit91]

Everything you see, hear, touch... it already happened before you knew it did.

Giggity

[AdamWW]

Giggity

You may say it's... 'premature'

[SuperHippo]

I think; therefore I am

[desslok]

You may say it's... 'premature'

Yeah I remember that one study that measured time dilation. Where we don’t technically “live” in the present but we are seeing things that happened in the “past”, but it seems like its occurring in real time to us, but this allows our brains to “slow down” or skew time or how it seems to be passing.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...ain-stops-time

[ManwittaPlan]

we're all communicating to a screen with wires behind it

[desslok]

The more I research it, I end up building a case for my friends point of view if you put these two perspectives together:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19857000/

https://www.newscientist.com/article...-know-i-exist/