I Know I Exist but I'm not so Sure about You

PairTheBoard · #1 03-27-2007, 04:48 PM

I've seen it asserted that Subjective Experience is not a reliable guide to "Truth". So we should limit outselves to that which can be logically deduced or objectively shown scientifically for reasonable representations of the "Truth".

Yet isn't the OP Topic a clear example where subjective experience provides a greater degree of certainty, a more "reliable guide" than objective empirical evidence or logical argument? You can show me all the empirical evidence and make all the logical arguments about the "Truth" of your existence. But they can never carry as much weight as my subjective experience for the Truth that I exist. There's always the possiblity that I'm somehow dreaming my life and everthing in it. So maybe you all are just figments of my imagination. I don't think you can produce arguments that deep down cast the same doubt on my conviction that I exist. I need no arguments or science to convince me of it and no arguments can sway me from my conviction. I subjectively "know" it and in this particular instance my subjective "knowledge" is greater than any objective knowledge on the same issue.

Notice I'm not claiming any Descartes type implications for this. I'm also not saying this example is not unique. However I think it is an example where subjective experience is more "reliable" than empirical scientific evidence or logical argument.

PairTheBoard

chezlaw · #2 03-27-2007, 04:50 PM

Pain is a good one.

chez

PairTheBoard · #3 03-27-2007, 05:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Pain is a good one.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

If you do something to induce pain in me that is strong empirical evidence that you exist. I agree. Furthermore, it inspires a subjective experience for me that magnifies my conviction that you exist. It also inspires in me a strategy for dealing with the phenomenon that is you. However, this would still not produce the same level of certainty for me of your existence as I have for mine. I could still just be dreaming you up - along with your actions toward me and their result.

Unless you meant something else.

PairTheBoard

chezlaw · #4 03-27-2007, 05:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Pain is a good one.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

If you do something to induce pain in me that is strong empirical evidence that you exist. I agree. Furthermore, it inspires a subjective experience for me that magnifies my conviction that you exist. It also inspires in me a strategy for dealing with the phenomenon that is you. However, this would still not produce the same level of certainty for me of your existence as I have for mine. I could still just be dreaming you up - along with your actions toward me and their result.

Unless you meant something else.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry I just meant that the subjective experience of pain is a totally reliable guide to the truth that pain is a real phenomena.

chez

FortunaMaximus · #5 03-27-2007, 05:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Pain is a good one.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

If you do something to induce pain in me that is strong empirical evidence that you exist. I agree. Furthermore, it inspires a subjective experience for me that magnifies my conviction that you exist. It also inspires in me a strategy for dealing with the phenomenon that is you. However, this would still not produce the same level of certainty for me of your existence as I have for mine. I could still just be dreaming you up - along with your actions toward me and their result.

Unless you meant something else.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry I just meant that the subjective experience of pain is a totally reliable guide to the truth that pain is a real phenomena.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

I took another tack with your first response here. What about causing pain? In taking the actions to do so, would an individual validate the existence of others?

Certainly not a line of inquiry a rational individual would like to test out. It's not nice.

PairTheBoard · #6 03-27-2007, 07:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Pain is a good one.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

If you do something to induce pain in me that is strong empirical evidence that you exist. I agree. Furthermore, it inspires a subjective experience for me that magnifies my conviction that you exist. It also inspires in me a strategy for dealing with the phenomenon that is you. However, this would still not produce the same level of certainty for me of your existence as I have for mine. I could still just be dreaming you up - along with your actions toward me and their result.

Unless you meant something else.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry I just meant that the subjective experience of pain is a totally reliable guide to the truth that pain is a real phenomena.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

gotcha. My subjective antenna must have been tuned to the wrong wavelength.

PairTheBoard

luckyme · #7 03-27-2007, 07:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Notice I'm not claiming any Descartes type implications for this. I'm also not saying this example is not unique. However I think it is an example where subjective experience is more "reliable" than empirical scientific evidence or logical argument.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's say your Subjective Experience of your existence is working just fine, just to move the argument along ( it'd pretty weak anyway).
Why would that mean it is at all reliable for anything but that? Having a 'feeling I exist' doesn't turn it into a all-purpose magic detector.
Xray detectors don't hear sounds.
Infrared goggles don't detect odors.
The "I'm here" experience can't claim other powers of discernment. Heck, if that's the case, we can just claim those too, we don't need any other evidence.
We can claim to read minds, see the past and future, talk to the dead, whatever ... and nobody can argue we're full of [censored] because we just haul out our "super-dooper I exist detector" claim and their objection must go away.

On a quiet day I'll grant you likely exist. Any other claims and you're going to have to belly up to the bar and haul out some heavy coin because my Super-dooper-I-exist-detector is much more reliable than yours.

luckyme

vhawk01 · #8 03-27-2007, 07:18 PM

I don't really think my subjective experience of my own existence is any more convincing that txag's subjective experience of God. It just matters WAY less. There isn't really any good reason to believe I actually do exist, but what could it hurt? Nothing would change. Its a lot like the free will argument....we probably don't, but what difference does it make? We may very well exist, but proving it wouldn't help anyone at all. So, we all just pretend as if its been settled, and you are allowed to attribute this great success to subjective experience.

PairTheBoard · #9 03-27-2007, 07:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I took another tack with your first response here. What about causing pain? In taking the actions to do so, would an individual validate the existence of others?

Certainly not a line of inquiry a rational individual would like to test out. It's not nice.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I do something to you that I know would cause me pain, and you report to me that it has caused you pain, I think that would be empirical evidence for me that you exist and experience reality like I do. It would raise my confidence in that Truth. But my confidence level about your existence would still not rise to the level I have for mine. Similiar things happen in my dreams, yet when I wake up I realize that none of the actors in my dream really had their own existence.

PairTheBoard

Philo · #10 03-27-2007, 07:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really think my subjective experience of my own existence is any more convincing that txag's subjective experience of God. It just matters WAY less. There isn't really any good reason to believe I actually do exist, but what could it hurt?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get it. So where does the cogito go wrong? Suppose you are wondering if you really do exist. In that case, how could you not?