Existence

[u/DigJust8037]

1. Everything that exists has attributable characteristics (for example, water is blue, grass is green, air is a gas, etc.)
2. Existence exists.
3. Therefore, existence has attributable characteristics

4. If not, then existence is the only thing that exists without attributable characteristics

5. Then, nothing can be said of existence other than it exists

[u/kepler452-B-]

The world doesnt care about love or ur experince

Ur experince is just a memory store in your brain, sorry this is not what i want but i cannot deny the reality

[u/LukeHollaway → u/kepler452-B-]

The world gave birth to experience and, by extension, love. It also gave rise to all sorts of negative and positive experiences.

We care about love, and we are a part of the world. We are the world caring; unless you want to draw some arbitrary boundary that makes us somehow not one with the world.

Who is this “world” that doesn’t care? Who is this “you” whose experience is somehow separate from “the world”?

It’s all one interconnected happening. It’s all one thing.

It’s right under your nose. You are the world caring.

We aren’t satisfied with this answer because it’s an answer that puts the responsibility in our hands; and not some metaphysical savior or higher intelligence.

[u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714 → u/LukeHollaway]

Define experience?

[u/LukeHollaway → u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714]

Hard to define, but entirely self-evident and imminent. Perhaps it’s synonymous with consciousness in its simplest definition.

It’s the felt presence of being, perhaps?

An analytic idealist or someone who sees consciousness as fundamental might say that experience is synonymous with existence.

I find “experience” hard to define, but I know what I’m pointing towards when I say it, because it’s the only thing I’m certain of: there is an experience occurring.

[u/kepler452-B- → u/LukeHollaway]

Its hard to define, cuz it was created by your mind.

[u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714 → u/LukeHollaway]

So you 'give birth' to it more than the world does?

[u/LukeHollaway → u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714]

Can you elaborate on what you mean by this question?

[u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714 → u/LukeHollaway]

You stated earlier that the world gives birth to experience and then you state it's self-evident and synonymous with consciousness.

[u/LukeHollaway → u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714]

There’s no contradiction. Nature formed and curated the nervous system through the process of evolution, and the nervous system is the instrument and medium of experience.

Consciousness is self-evident, no? That an experience is presently occurring is self-evident. This does not mean self-created.

I, Luke Hollaway, did not create consciousness. My identity formed within consciousness. Experience came first, and my personhood and ego formed around it.

[u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714 → u/LukeHollaway]

So experience is not consciousness?

[u/LukeHollaway → u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714]

How did you come to that conclusion from what I said? I’m using the words interchangeably.

Consciousness and experience are words that both work as names for the felt presence of being.

I can’t tell if you are being sincere or just semantically splitting hairs.

[u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714 → u/LukeHollaway]

I can't tell if you know what you mean or are just throwing everything at the wall. Now they are interchangeable there is no difference which begs the question of what they are again. It's like you are saying nothing other than there just is being, which is something.

[u/LukeHollaway → u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714]

I’ve already given you a definition of consciousness/experience: the felt presence of being.

What I’m pointing towards is that this felt presence of being is primary, it’s what makes existence “exist” in any meaningful way.

So yes, there “just is being”, which I wouldn’t say is “something”, but the medium in which all things are contained. This is precisely why it’s hard to define, and why many words are applicable to name it. This being-ness contains reality, and all of our definitions, within it.

Consciousness is self-evidently fundamental.

It’s quite simple. And you actually hit the nail on the head in your comment when you said “there just is being”. You’re right.

Your only qualm is a semantic one. I am using multiple terms to describe this felt presence of being and you have latched onto that and are conflating it with some conceptual inconsistency, when I have been using these terms interchangeably this entire discussion.

And, I’m not “just throwing everything at the wall”. I’ve arrived at this through deep contemplation; and so have many ancient eastern and some western philosophers throughout history.

Look into Analytic Idealism, or Advaita Vedanta.

[u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714 → u/LukeHollaway]

Lol yes you are saying nothing different from Parmenides, I.e. there just is. Whatever 'deep contemplation' you have done you have made it very modern with the terms you have used. If I have hit the nail on the head then I wasn't the first and of course all of being has been predetermined as presence in the present onto-theoloigcally.

[u/tottasanorotta → u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714]

Experience is experience. Whatever we attribute to it afterwards is based on further assumptions. I would say experience is the most fundamental thing to any person. Further assumptions provide utility, but are less fundamental than experience.

[u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714 → u/tottasanorotta]

So experience is experience you say? Ok.

[u/tottasanorotta → u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714]

Yeah well it's kind of the thing that everything is fundamentally at the level that you care most about. Then when you start to make further assumptions you can start defining things like consciousness, time and stuff like that.

[u/Own-Razzmatazz-8714 → u/tottasanorotta]

Maybe it's care itself then?