>>494549066
>There is object, and there is percept. The object you don't know if it exists or not. You only ever get the percept.
"X exists" is really just head canon about sufficiently consistent and recurring percepts, but you are trying to remove it from the realm of percepts. It's a pointless exercise. It doesn't really mean anything to say that X doesn't "really" exist but only "appears" to exist, nor does it mean anything to say that what "really" exists doesn't correspond to any percepts.

>Unless your enemy is in the room right now, what we're dealing with is a memory.
My Sister in Christ, have you developed object permanence yet? No, the enemy is not in the room with me right now but that doesn't mean he isn't anywhere.

>You're walking in the forest and a cannibal starts running after you, it's clear that he intends to kill you and eat you. This is one thing.
That's a 'threat'. Thinking in terms of 'threats' is sufficient if you're a bird or a bug or something but not when you're a human dealing with other humans, or with recurring attacks from certain types or animals. When you're a human, you have to consider chronic threats because you're a vulnerable little monkey thing with only a big brain to help you.

>A court sentences you. A woman rejects you and thinks you're worth less than the dirt under her shoe. Someone at work scoffs at you, has a scornful attitude toward you. Someone doesn't say hi back. Your boss tells all your coworkers they can have coffee, but doesn't tell you you can have coffee, because he doesn't want to give you any. Etc etc. These are quite different from the cannibal.
They're not enemies. They're just dumb normies.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/pol/

Thread:

Over 90% of people:>It doesn't matter whether the physical world exists or not, whether matter exists or not, I experience it as real so…

Over 90% of people:
>It doesn't matter whether the physical world exists or not, whether matter exists or not, I experience it as real so…