Value to who we are - A premise of Seeing argument.

[TransmutingSoul]

Please show that things can't exist unless somebody has exact and complete perception of that thing.

Otherwise P2 is bare assertion.

I never got the meaning of the question "If a tree in the Forrest falls and there is no one to hear it, does it make a sound.

I always use to say of course it does. I now consider that is wrong, as it does not make a sound if there is no ear and mind around to translate those vibrations into sound.

Likewise the existence we live in requires the senses and mind to translate into relative understandings.

This life is actually an Illusion, temporal, a vapor in the desert.

Regards Tony

 

[ChristineM]

I never got the meaning of the question "If a tree in the Forrest falls and there is no one to hear it, does it make a sound.

I always use to say of course it does. I now consider that is wrong, as it does not make a sound if there is no ear and mind around to translate those vibrations into sound.

Likewise the existence we live in requires the senses and mind to translate into relative understandings.

This life is actually an Illusion, temporal, a vapor in the desert.

Regards Tony

The air moves, vibrates, that is the sound, it acts on its surroundings, leaves, blades of grass, ferns, birds and other forest animals.
That there is no human ear to hear it makes no difference to the vibrating air.


And objects that exist, rocks, trees, plants, rivers etc exist and have existed many millions of years before humans came along toa question existence

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The air moves, vibrates, that is the sound, it acts on its surroundings, leaves, blades of grass, ferns, birds and other forest animals.
That there is no human ear to hear it makes no difference to the vibrating air.


And objects that exist, rocks, trees, plants, rivers etc exist and have existed many millions of years before humans came along toa question existence

Yet there is no sound, but moving air and vibrations, unless interpreted. Thus this existence is relative to our minds interpretation of what our senses feed to us.

Regards Tony

 

[ChristineM]

Yet there is no sound, but moving air and vibrations, unless interpreted. Thus this existence is relative to our minds interpretation of what our senses feed to us.

Regards Tony

Have you asked the birds whether there was sound?

A definition of sound.

vibraions that travel through the air or another medium and can be heard when they reach a person's or animal's ear.​

Can be heard, not must be heard

 

[Link]

Plenty of assumption, no hard evidence

That's not the premise we are looking at in this thread.

 

[Dimi95]

Have you asked the birds whether there was sound?

Can we understand the language of the birds as of the humans?
They can't interpret/define sound like humans,so birds are irrelevant in the argument.

A definition of sound.

vibraions that travel through the air or another medium and can be heard when they reach a person's or animal's ear.​

Can be heard, not must be heard

Yes , that is definition of sound.

Sound in physical form is just air and vibration.

"In physics, sound is produced in the form of a pressure wave. When an object vibrates, it causes the surrounding air molecules to vibrate, initiating a chain reaction of sound wave vibrations throughout the medium."

 

[ChristineM]

That's not the premise we are looking at in this thread.

Well if you start with an assumption i have to assume the premise you are looking for is an assumption

 

[Link]

Well if you start with an assumption i have to assume the premise you are looking for is an assumption

This thread, was to discuss a certain premise. It was the one I bolded.

 

[ChristineM]

Can we understand the language of the birds as of the humans?
They can't interpret/define sound like humans,so birds are irrelevant in the argument

Birds can hear, whatever they interpret sound as makes no difference to the sound

 

[Dimi95]

Birds can hear, whatever they interpret sound as makes no difference to the sound

Yes , by our interpretation.
That's why you don't need definition.
Have you asked the birds whether there was sound?

That's why:

Yet there is no sound, but moving air and vibrations, unless interpreted. Thus this existence is relative to our minds interpretation of what our senses feed to us.

So , if you scream how will your brain interpret that?
by definition
by physycal form
by both of them


Either of this three is in some way truth , That's why relative.

 

[Aupmanyav]

But we with some truth to our assessment realize it's not the whole thing.

Yeah, not everyone can assess correctly, but it can be and has been done.

Have you asked the birds whether there was sound?

No need to ask them. Their reaction explains this. Shout at a bird and it flies away (sensing some dangerous intent).

From nothing you get nothing.

That is not a sure thing after the advent of Quantum Mechanics.
What we get is an impression in mind unless we look closely.

In your case, I don't think I can prove to you God except through other than this argument.

Yeah, you have always tried hard about that and about 'Ghayaba', but have not convinced anyone.

 

[ChristineM]

Yes , by our interpretation.
That's why you don't need definition.
Have you asked the birds whether there was sound?

That's why:

Yet there is no sound, but moving air and vibrations, unless interpreted. Thus this existence is relative to our minds interpretation of what our senses feed to us.

So , if you scream how will your brain interpret that?
by definition
by physycal form
by both of them


Either of this three is in some way truth , That's why relative.

I provided a scientific definition i am happy with, that you don't like it is not my problem

 

[RestlessSoul]

I am not sure how accurate the claim "a perception does not exist until it is perceived" actually is.

Some would go further;

 

[FredVB]

p1 If God does not exist, there doesn't exist a perception to who we exactly are (since he alone can judge perfectly to value).
p2 If there doesn't exist a perception to exactly who we are, there doesn't exist exact value to who we are.
p3 There exists exact value to who we are (assertion)
Therefore God exists. (modus tollens with transitional rule to p2 and p1)

p1: Not G -> Not S
p2: Not S -> Not V
p3: V
c: G (modus tollens with transitional rule to p2 and p1)



I would argue if there is no concrete reality to who we are, would not be able to guesstimate to who we are. We guesstimate even without knowing the concrete value of ourselves or anyone, but have to live with some sort of estimation of people's actions and ours. These two relate, how we see ourselves impacts how we see others and vice versa. But we with some truth to our assessment realize it's not the whole thing.

That is to say, when you write a program on a computer, there is two ways it can happen:

(1) Writing a program in real life on a computer (you know computer exists)
(2) Writing a program in a dream on a computer (you assume it exists)'

To elaborate 2, and make the analogy, if you were lucid dreaming, you can write on the computer, but you wouldn't expect there to be a real program if you were fully aware that it's but a dream. You wouldn't take writing on it seriously, since it can produce anything, and have no bearing on what you program, since it's made up.

Same with the self and value. You make some sort of assessment on belief that hidden behind your vision, is a reality that there is true value. A true assessment of you is contained. The only way you should believe there is no true value, if you cease all assessment entirely related to personhood and value to people. You can't, because it's that ingrained in you to know you have value.

(V) Value to who we are.
(A) Assessment (estimation/guessing type) to who we are

Not V -> Not A
A
Therefore V (Modus tollens)

I am not proficient by any means with logicese. I agree still there is no real absolute value for anything without God really being, while I am sure nothing would be existing without the essential necessary existence, that I understand is God.

I do not agree with others, who do think this, that there are creatures whose lives have no value. God existing and being Creator of all is meaning all creatures, which were brought into being, have value. As God their Maker cares for them, with provision for them, it is modeled that we should in general with valuing what has value also care for other creatures with having good stewardship to this world as we were meant to do with its environments and creatures in them.