1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Are Mind and Body independent from each other?

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by stashik-metik, Oct 20, 2016.

  1. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    I said thought concepts are not things in the same way as a 'physical' object. It is a thing. It is a mental concept. Not only is it a thing, but it is all there is, because the physicality of it is an illusion.

    I'm a rationalist idealist and you are an empiracist materialist. Rationalists only use logic and reason including math. Empiracist materialists use sensory experience as a foundation and then try to use logic and reason on top of it. You are coming at this in the wrong way.

    Light, things that seem solid (but arent), and thought concepts are all things. Some things don't have the illusion of solidity, and some do. Photons occupy multiple spaces at the same time, and are not solid. Light is 0 or the mathematical point. A monad, in which there is infinity of, is zero or a mathematical point. There must be infinite zeros because if the conditions are such that one zero can exist, then it is compulsory that infinite zeros exist. Zero is a thing... a mental concept. If zero exists then automatically all numbers between one and infinity exist. This is why everything exists. It would be impossible for it not to exist.

    All that exists are infinite combinations of numbers, constantly changing. My goal is create the conditions necessary to solve this mathematical problem until all numbers cancel to zero.

    Materialist Empiracists by their very definitions do not have a foundation in logic, reason or mathematics. When the basis for all knowledge is sensory information, and reason is only complementary, you will come up with the wrong answers. Only rationalists use the rational foundation, so only they can come up with the correct answer to a question that is beyond the sensory experience. By the very definition of what rationalism is, this is a fact.

    Mathematics is the only thing that can explain zero and infinity. Because mathematics is a mental concept, all of reality must be a mental concept. Reality can only exist the simplest way possible. It can not create something other then it's self. You have to go against the very laws of rationalist philosophy to make this claim. The mathematical point is the simplest possible way to describe a monad. The simplest thing a point can do next is make a line. It is highly likely that non 'material' energy waves are these lines. That they are mathematical functions which our senses mistake as a physical world. Quantum physics is another place that points to this being the case. These claims I have made, begin in logic and reason and only with that basis have I used my senses to add to that basis. Your senses are useless if you dont do it in that order. Logic and reason first, and only then senses. Senses are not a rational basis.

    Mathematics IS logic and reason in its perfect form. Reality can be nothing else. If you can think of another thing that could describe our reality at the monadic level as perfectly as math, I would be open minded to hearing it however.
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2017
  2. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

    Try to think and exist without a body.

    These are scientific assumptions of things that go beyond the limits of human sensory observation abilities.

    These are thoughts, produced by a thinking being made of matter.

    Take away the individual who comes up with these thoughts and you have no concepts of "mathematics", "zero" or "infinity" anymore.
  3. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    Saying that one can not think without a body is an assumption. The assumption being that mind comes from a material body. Something is not true simply because you have stated it as such. You keep claiming that what we experience is hard bits of matter. You have made no attempt to prove this claim. In fact no philosopher or anyone for thst matter has ever been able to.

    I am going to start at the very beginning. I have proven it. You are not understanding why what I'm saying is true is true. I'm beginning with no assumptions either way. The only thing im going to use is logic and reason by stating things that must be true. Every statement that I make that must be true does not break any rules of philosophy. Philosophy by it's very definition is the art of logical, reasonable thought used to find truths.

    What I'm saying is going to be in opposition to purely sensory empiracist claims. This is because sensory experience is inferior to rational claims that must be true. If you can find one example of any philosopher who has ever found my following reason why this is, to be untrue, please fill me in. If you find a flaw in this reasoning, let me know.

    It is impossible to prove that you are not a brain in a vat using sensory information. If you oppose this claim, let me know why it's not true please. It is certain that people think and that they have a mind. In fact this is the only ultimate certainty. If we don't assume that it is possible to know more about existance we would have to stop here. This is the only assumption I will be using from this point on.

    Some statements must be true like a circle can not be a square or a dog can not be a cat. The following are some such claims.

    1) Whatever attributes the created thing has, the creator thing must contain as well. A thing can not pass down a trait that it does not posses in any form.

    2) nothing material can be nothing. There is no example of a material thing ever being nothing. Nothing is a mental concept.

    3) nothing (as a mental concept) is also the cancellation of a positive number and a negative number. Therefore the mental concept of nothing is something. Nothing (as a mental concept) is a number.

    4) (As a mental concept) if any number exists, that automatically means that all numbers exist. As a mental concept, there is not only one number... There are infinity numbers.

    5) Reality can only come to exist in the most simple and efficient way possible. It can not and will not take unnessessary steps.

    These four above statements are necessary truths. These necessarily true statements use reason and logic in order to prove that the default thing is mental, and that it can not create matter. Also that a monad contains all possibilities.

    1) If one monad is created, it is compulsory that infinite monads were created. To word this another way, if one monad has exactly what it needs to spontaneously exist, then automatically this means that infinite others did the same thing.

    2) to repeat the above rule, only the most efficient and simple method is possible.

    In addition to the previous conclusion, we can now also conclude that there are infinite monads that are mental. Because the 'point' is the most simple mental concept, a monad is represented by the point. Because a line is the simplest thing a point can do, this is what it would do.

    If one believes in their senses, they could go further and now use empiracism on this basis of things which must be true. The sensory information however can be wrong. If the sensory information (which is empiracism) contradicts the truths gathered by logic, reason and mathematics, then they are to be deemed false. If the sensory empiracism is complimentary to the rationalist truths, they may be correct, but it is also possible they are incorrect dispite the correlation.
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2017
  4. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

    It is. It's a thought, just like the opposite of it is also a thought. Mentioning anything is a thought. Whenever something is expressed, it exists. It's only the Non-existent that never gets expressed <--- even this is just hinting at the Non-existent with using existing things (thoughts). Anything that exists is something. From then on, it's down to semantics whether one chooses to call it matter, or bunnies, or vebelebemehe, or even not call it anything, it exists.
  5. softboober

    softboober Active Member

    Interesting. o_O Is it one single mind, or multiple individual minds? What is a mind made of?
  6. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    Whether it's considered one mind or many depends. I'm not sure how to answer that but I'll try...

    If the zeros are light, because they occupy the same space, this could make their mind one.

    It's possible a zero uses its infinite number combinations to create many subjective minds. It might have no choice to only make some combinations and not others since zero contains infinity. It explains evil in the world perfectly. This view might be less likely because if everyone had an essence that they could not change, then there would be no point in evolution or reincarnation.

    It's also possible that each zero creates only one single form with infinite potentiality. Evolution and reincarnation makes sense if the monad wished to become perfect.

    In both possibilities, everything is made up of number combinations that came from monadic zeros... even something like a spec of dirt.

    What is It made of? It's made of nothing. At the same time It's everything as it contains it's opposite.
    softboober likes this.
  7. Daniel Delion

    Daniel Delion Member

    Interesting discussion.

    The only thing certain is that something exists. Things like people, thinking and mind are evolved concepts, not axioms.

    Are you sure? Take cyanoacrylate for example, commonly called "super glue". It's fluid, yet when it reacts with water, which is another fluid, it polymerizes and becomes solid. One solid from the interaction of two fluids.

    The above statement comes from the false premise that zero and nothing are the same thing. Read this mathematical explanation to see they aren't.

    Not sure why that would be the case. For a good while, the concept of zero didn't exist, nor did negative numbers or complex numbers.

    The above statement implies that reality has its own mind.

    There were five. :)
    softboober likes this.
  8. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    That mind exists is an axiom to any rationalist. This is because to the rationalist, every single question can be discovered with rational thinking within the mind. Only materialists say that truths like this can't be known certainly. This is because no matter how many experiments you do, it's still possible that those results could be found wrong and because anything non physical is out of reach of experiments.

    Both of those things contain numbers! That's the only thing that everything contains.

    Reality is mind.
    softboober likes this.
  9. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

    Buddha is a dry shit stick.
    softboober likes this.
  10. softboober

    softboober Active Member

  11. softboober

    softboober Active Member

    I think someone said earlier that it was 'thinking exists', and it's good enuff for me. :p

    Oh here it is, it was @Daman in the 'absolute truth' thread, but what he wrote fits here, too:

  12. softboober

    softboober Active Member

    My problem with this view is that both 'rationalist' and 'materialist' are labels, they come after the thinking I mentioned in the above post. If you say only the mind exists, you can't really put the rationalist and materialist labels before it. o_O
  13. softboober

    softboober Active Member

    Wait, are numbers and mind are different or the same now? :eek: Does an apple contain numbers? :p
  14. softboober

    softboober Active Member

    lol I had no idea they used sticks before toilet paper was invented. Might be worth to try... mabee not. :confused:
    Ruryse likes this.
  15. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

    Me neither, for a good while. lol The first time I read this koan, it went like "Buddha is a dry shit on a stick". It worked that way, too, but wasn't as descriptive regarding the function of the stick.
  16. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

Share This Page