|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:45 pm
Existentialism: The idea that things only exist when we need them to exist. For instance, when you close a door, that which exists beyond the door no longer exists because you cannot, and therefore do not need to, sense it. However, opening the door brings all that back into existence because you require something to exist beyond the door. Any questions???
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 10:47 am
Ah, interesting~ so if i were to stop looking at my watch, time would no longer exist because im not looking at the watch face, but if i were to look back at my watch, it would---
so in my example, would time stop since im not looking at the watch? (this is just a question dealing with extentialism, nothing more, nothing less)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 3:57 pm
Existentialism applies to sense. If you can still sense time moving, and still require time to move, then it shall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 5:49 pm
... But if I were to close my eyes (disregarding what light passes through our eyelids) the images that I once saw would no longer be? This does not make sense to me, though... Existentialism must be based upon a self-centered universe theory. b
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:51 am
Indeed it is. I know a lot of it myself, yet I know only one believer in person. And it's not me. It's one of my teachers. As for closing your eyes, you still have the senses of hearing, smelling, and touching to identify reality. So your existence would be limited to those things which you could immediately detect with those senses. Anything beyond the range of said senses would not exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:17 am
thats interesting, Mobius---as long as i need it, it exists or as long as i sense it, it exists...
*ahem* sorry for sounding stupid, but what exactly is the 'self-centered universe theory'?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 2:57 pm
Oh, I don't know if there really is "the" self-centered universe theory, I just used it to describe the situation. I'm not surprised that you're not existentialist, Mobius. It seems that would conflict with your previously stated ideas concerning chaos. b
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:42 pm
Bellabie Oh, I don't know if there really is "the" self-centered universe theory, I just used it to describe the situation. ah, i see~ sweatdrop lol i thought it was a real theory
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:18 pm
Chaos can be the most expected AND the least expected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Yes, yes, I believe we've established that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 5:52 am
Exactly. And you are stil surprised I'm not Existentialist, knowing this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:50 pm
No, sir. Let's look at what I wrote, now. I I'm not surprised that you're not existentialist, Mobius. Hm? Perhaps the double-negative misled. b
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:07 pm
As a speed reader, I sometimes overlook these things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:45 pm
Understood. As a slow typist, I often overlook such things, as well. b
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:20 pm
In the beginning, there was
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
