cogito ergo sum

[OANST]

I watched a film that said babies, because of their undeveloped minds, think an object disappears from existence if it moves out of their field of vision. I don't know if that is related to what you were saying, but there ya go.

Peekaboo!

[Wings of Fire]

Object permenance doesn't develop in children until they're old enough to realize themselves in relation to the world. At the age of around four.

[Bullet Magnet]

You do have to learn how to see (i.e. interpret information from eyes), though. If only once. Whether that process involves concsious thought, I've no idea.

You can recreate that experience through the use of special helmets that inverse your vision. It transforms you from a suave ladykiller into clumsy fool, until you adjust. Then you have the helmet confiscated and you get to adjust again.

[OANST]

I used to wear a special helmet.

[MeechMunchie]

I still do. It stops the aliens from reading my mind.

[OANST]

Mine has a drool cup.

[STM]

My special helmet has straps so that when I strain in bed I can't fall out...bastards

[Nate]

Object permenance doesn't develop in children until they're old enough to realize themselves in relation to the world. At the age of around four.

It can't be that old. My 18 month-old niece knows I'm still around the house even if she can't see me. That's why she likes playing hide and seek.

I think perhaps you're talking about that thing that I can't remember the name of, in which children think that the nature of an object is defined by its appearance. Thus, they would think that a man in woman's clothing has become a woman or that a dog with a cat mask on has become a cat.

[Wings of Fire]

I'm talking about out of sight out of mind, where if you're not the primary caregiver, you cease to exist if you can't be seen.

And I may have been a little high.

[Nate]

And I may have been a little high.

High in your estimation, or have you taken up a new hobby?

[Wings of Fire]

I'm not at liberty to answer that.

[MA]

DRUGS R BAD DRUGS R BAD

i now take drugs.

[ziggy]

So all philosophers are stoners.

[OANST]

All philosophers are stones.

[STM]

All stones are philosophers.

[Manco]

Philosopher's Stone am I right guys?

someone had to

[STM]

Your right!

[T-nex]

Your right!

No. Your left!

[STM]

I'm centre left actually!

[LDG519]

Okay I must admit I havent read every single post in this thread yet so there may be a facter that disproves my argument.

my theory is that if we were made up there would be chunks missing in our lives, all the major factors would exist but little details would be missing, such as what time you got up in the morning or how many cupcakes you had at a party, I base this on the premis of who can think up a whole 18 years of constant things happening without skipping some small details

[Bullet Magnet]

Okay I must admit I havent read every single post in this thread yet so there may be a facter that disproves my argument.

my theory is that if we were made up there would be chunks missing in our lives, all the major factors would exist but little details would be missing, such as what time you got up in the morning or how many cupcakes you had at a party, I base this on the premis of who can think up a whole 18 years of constant things happening without skipping some small details

Can you remember 18 years of your life without missing some details? Did those missing details ever actually occur? How do you know?

[LDG519]

good point

[STM]

For something to exist forever, there must be something as solid evidence like a photograph, if the great wall of china, in 600 years collapsed and some how, after another 600 years all evidence of it's existence, besides a few legendary stories, was destroyed, did it ever exist?

[Nate]

For something to exist forever, there must be something as solid evidence like a photograph, if the great wall of china, in 600 years collapsed and some how, after another 600 years all evidence of it's existence, besides a few legendary stories, was destroyed, did it ever exist?

What's your point? Are you trying to disprove God's existence now?

[T-nex]

If a tree falls down in a forest, but there's no one to hear it, did it truly make a sound? Omgwtfbbq D=

[Nate]

Yes, of course it did. Sound is merely the vibration of atoms, it doesn't need an audience to exist.

[T-nex]

Well, I'd have answered: It makes vibrations, because sound is what we hear. Or soundwaves.

It will never make a sound the same way which is translated in our ears, if there was no ear to translate it. Whooptie!

[Nate]

Okay, here's a nice philosophical question for you: How do you know that the sound as it is translated to your ear is the same as how it's translated in my ear?

And how do you know that you see the colour blue in the same way that I do? Perhaps I see blue the way you see red!

[T-nex]

But the soundwave still get's translated into something in your ear. May not be the same as mine, but it was just vibration before it hit something that could translate it it something. uh.. Yeah. Something like that.

And the fact is that even if we don't see the same colors, we still do see colors.

[Manco]

Unless one of us is colourblind.