Do ideas exist?

[McBell]

But you understand that an idea, in order to not be 'the brain', must be something of it's own. In other words, all the chemical and electrical signals are either the brain...or the idea....

Idea's must be something separate from the brain to be considered real things.

Why?
I mean, why "must" they be separate?

 

[Kenny]

Do ideas exist? What does your perspective imply for what "existence" means?

I have an idea that it does exist.

 

[Quintessence]

But you understand that an idea, in order to not be 'the brain', must be something of it's own. In other words, all the chemical and electrical signals are either the brain...or the idea....

Idea's must be something separate from the brain to be considered real things.

Why? Do you apply this standard of separation to everything else?

Sorry, that's rhetorical question* so let's reframe that. Why do you hold ideas to a different/special/double standard?

*to clarify, it is a rhetorical question because I don't doubt you consider your heart a "real thing" in spite of not being separate from the rest of your body. I also don't doubt you consider yourself in general a "real thing" in spite of not being separate from the environment you live in. And so on.

 

[Tambourine]

But you understand that an idea, in order to not be 'the brain', must be something of it's own. In other words, all the chemical and electrical signals are either the brain...or the idea....

Idea's must be something separate from the brain to be considered real things.

I don't understand you, because your words aren't real.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

This is an impossible ask for a couple reasons. First, because of human limitations when it comes to sensation and perception or how we can study the world around us. Second, because it seems there is no such thing as independent existence as all reality (however that is defined) is interconnected. It is not a thing we can know; we can only pick the story we like and run with it (or not) as we see fit.

I was talking about independent to the same degree as, say, a car and a tree are independent.

Yes, the things we think of as discrete objects are actually somewhat fuzzy probability distributions when it comes right down to it, but I think it's still meaningful within our normal paradigm to recognize that the act of thinking - i.e. having an idea - is tied to the substance of a thinking thing in the way that a given car is not tied to a given tree.

I mean, I get that the idea of discrete objects is really more accepted convention than physical law of the universe, but that still means that it is a convention with a certain underlying understanding of how things work.

 

[Secret Chief]

"The universe exists independent of our minds" is an idea, is it not?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Do ideas exist? What does your perspective imply for what "existence" means?

They exist, but not independently. They are reliant on a conscious entity holding them.

 

[Revoltingest]

So I say they are two kinds of existence, physical and abstract. Maybe there are more types but that's as far as I got my thinking done.

Just easier to keep track and realize some exist both as an idea/concept and a physical reality.

I like one kind of existence.
All of yours are inter-related anyway.

 

[Revoltingest]

But you understand that an idea, in order to not be 'the brain', must be something of it's own. In other words, all the chemical and electrical signals are either the brain...or the idea....

Idea's must be something separate from the brain to be considered real things.

The ideas are properties / actions of the brain.

 

[crossfire]

Do ideas exist? What does your perspective imply for what "existence" means?

Is the Declaration of Independence merely paper and ink? What distinguishes it from other configurations of paper and ink? How do you identify it from a random collection of configurations of paper and ink? Even if you take the paper and ink away, and digitize it, would you still be able to recognize it? Is it still the Declaration of Independence without the paper and ink?

 

[Brickjectivity]

This line of thinking is part of why I find unqualified atheism nonsensical. Gods are, if nothing else, an idea. A very powerful one that affects the choices people make. How can it do that without existing? What do we really mean when we say something exists? Are we consistent about that standard? If we aren't, what do those inconsistencies say about us and our beliefs or assumptions about things?

I hadn't thought about it that way, and I think we have different ideas. I'm probably not expressing my idea clearly.

I think that all ideas have potential to exist before they are ideas, part of the potential for anything that does not exist. The potential for an idea is the same as the potential for cubes to exist or birds or a song. I mean that there is an infinity of things which could be, and unthought ideas are part of those.

You are departing this at a different angle. You're saying something similar to an ontological argument, perhaps. I'm struggling with it. Affecting our choices makes the idea a form of matter like the higgs boson causes gravity?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

All things that cannot be measured, no weight, no atoms... It's nothing.

Where would you say they exist?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

This line of thinking is part of why I find unqualified atheism nonsensical. Gods are, if nothing else, an idea. A very powerful one that affects the choices people make. How can it do that without existing? What do we really mean when we say something exists? Are we consistent about that standard? If we aren't, what do those inconsistencies say about us and our beliefs or assumptions about things?

Nobody is suggesting the idea of God doesn't exist, or that the idea of God doesn't have impact. Indeed, most atheists I'm aware of would argue the opposite. That doesn't require 'qualification' of atheism.

 

[Cooky]

Where would you say they exist?

I would say they don't actually exist.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I would say they don't actually exist.

Ha! Fair enough. I wouldn't put it like that. It's an interesting topic!!!

 

[Mr Spinkles]

This would mean ideas are quintessentially ephemeral, then - more so than the flesh, at any rate. Here today, gone tomorrow. Where do ideas go when they are gone?



That's what I felt as a kid, but I happened upon this young enough that it just made adults annoyed at me when I would question their assumptions about reality. Or maybe it was because there was this eight year old kid remarking upon deep questions of life, the universe, and everything (which for some reason, most adults found shocking). I stumbled across how inconsistently adults defined existence and reality... then called them out on it. Somehow, that became my fault... haha.

It sounds like you were a little Calvin when you were young.

So, what answer did you land upon?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I think some of my fellow atheists are slightly too quick to gloss over this.

For example, ideas are not “just” the sum of the operations of a brain. If an idea is written down on paper, and the brain that originally thought the idea stops thinking ... the idea remains, encoded in the physical configuration of text on a page. At some later point in time, a different brain that beholds the page can unpack that information.

So, in a very real sense, ideas are not **simply** like any other natural phenomenon, such as lightning. It’s a little more interesting than that.

For example, ideas don’t just disappear when a brain stops thinking the idea. They can jump from a brain into the outside world, and sit there dormant or get slowly corrupted by the passage of time, and then jump back into a brain again. There is information that has been encoded, and while that information cannot exist **apart** from a physical form to encode it, it is also not **bound** to one physical form.

That is very, very interesting (to me) from a pure physics perspective. The interesting question becomes what are the laws that govern the generation, transmission and processing of information .... and how does that compare / contrast to energy.

My own view is that intelligent apes like us have learned to take such profound advantage of the physics of information, just like we have with the physics of energy, that it’s easy to become superstitious and wonder if the things we have unlocked have a separate, supernatural existence. When humans first unlocked the power of fire it was worshipped .... isn’t it natural that when we unlocked the power of written information, that too was worshipped? Sacred fires, and sacred texts.

 

[viole]

Do ideas exist?

I have no idea.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Hockeycowboy]

What did this thread originate with?

Yes, that idea did exist. But.... Does it still? No, it was completed / ended when @Quintessence began it.
Maybe he'll have another one?

 

[crossfire]

I think some of my fellow atheists are slightly too quick to gloss over this.

For example, ideas are not “just” the sum of the operations of a brain. If an idea is written down on paper, and the brain that originally thought the idea stops thinking ... the idea remains, encoded in the physical configuration of text on a page. At some later point in time, a different brain that beholds the page can unpack that information.

So, in a very real sense, ideas are not **simply** like any other natural phenomenon, such as lightning. It’s a little more interesting than that.

For example, ideas don’t just disappear when a brain stops thinking the idea. They can jump from a brain into the outside world, and sit there dormant or get slowly corrupted by the passage of time, and then jump back into a brain again. There is information that has been encoded, and while that information cannot exist **apart** from a physical form to encode it, it is also not **bound** to one physical form.

That is very, very interesting (to me) from a pure physics perspective. The interesting question becomes what are the laws that govern the generation, transmission and processing of information .... and how does that compare / contrast to energy.

My own view is that intelligent apes like us have learned to take such profound advantage of the physics of information, just like we have with the physics of energy, that it’s easy to become superstitious and wonder if the things we have unlocked have a separate, supernatural existence. When humans first unlocked the power of fire it was worshipped .... isn’t it natural that when we unlocked the power of written information, that too was worshipped? Sacred fires, and sacred texts.

Before the written word, there was the oral tradition--referred to Mnemosyne's pool by the Greeks. Memory and remembrance was acknowledged to be a very real and powerful thing that could haunt people, evoke feelings, and serve as a warning or as a source of mental nourishment, or of inspiration for artists. It can be so powerful that people who have never heard the actual oral tradition could be affected by it. (Jung called this an aspect of the Collective Unconscious.)