External World

You have 5 seconds to prove the existence of the external world.

Protip: you can't

Attached: descartes.jpg (476x484, 73K)

Here is one hand

>go to bed
>wake up
>still here

I can't prove it but it's still in front of me

Attached: 1520901627804.gif (500x500, 971K)

>pulls out dick and jacks on your gf's face
There. I proved you were wrong and you got cucked, faggot. Nothing personnel, though.

I have a consciousness of time.
Determination in time is only possible through a permanent thing in perception, a thing against which to weigh consciousness.
Consciousness of time is necessarily connected with a possibility of a determination of this consciousness within time.
This permanent thing in perception cannot be something within me, for the very reason that this thing is used to determine my own consciousness within time. Neither can this thing which actually aids the determination be a mere representation of a thing, for in the case of a mere representation in this sense (i.e. an image in imagination) the representation is properly interior, and has no connection to the possibility of determining consciousness in time.
Therefore there exists something permanent in perception that is not myself.

Attached: kant2.jpg (888x888, 128K)

How was he so smart?

...

Take "I think therefore I am" and "I can sense things therefore they exist" as axioms. You don't have to, but enjoy the constant "am I real?" and "are other things real?" questioning if you don't.

>presupposing that you're sensing things

>Determination in time is only possible through a permanent thing in perception, a thing against which to weigh consciousness.

What does this mean?

>I have a consciousness of time.
Nice try but you only had five seconds.

For something to be determined in time, it has to be determined in relation to something else, which is considered "permanent" in relation to the thing being determined. There must be some fixed point from which to discern directions.

The past cannot be proven to exist. All evidence of the past is simply present sensation. So the past cannot be pointed at or proven definitively. So the permanent by which Kant seeks to definitively prove the external is itself in doubt.

Pain and grievances with other creatures. If you're receiving unwelcome stimuli from the other, you can be relatively sure it isn't just a failing of your willpower and mental fortitude, but an actual response to your surroundings, which are phenomenologically real.

you can cum in 5 seconds?

She is not here with me

The distinction between the external world and internal world is a false one.

Forms rely on consciousness, and consciousness relies on forms.

All reality is non-dual.

>You have 5 seconds to prove the existence of the external world.
I can prove (and disprove!) it in less than that.

this. we partake of God's contradiction.

Attached: op.jpg (1000x563, 69K)

Merleau-Ponty uses Descartes' own argument to do so, at least with the body. Ecological arguments can be used to extend that infinitely. Hilariously enough. these arguments are all largely based in medieval philosophy and theology.
>Consciousness of time is necessarily connected with a possibility of a determination of this consciousness within time.
Nope. Stop taking a shittalker like Kant seriously, please.
>presupposing that you're thinking things

>Protip: you can't

I refute you thus.

>I can prove (and disprove!) it in less than that.

Attached: 1520020077549.jpg (500x500, 73K)

>Nope. Stop taking a shittalker like Kant seriously, please.

wat?

well tbf so could you

Attached: food-non-stick-cake-butter-knife-butter-spatula.jpg (581x536, 48K)

Circular logic, I can still doubt you, your cum on my girlfriend - if I have one.

haha sorry faggot I have a boyfriend

Calm down, me.

Attached: das stirn.png (196x341, 38K)

Oops, meant for (me)

Rational measurements of observed objects/phenomena are consistent with internal models that predict the existence of an external world. All human experience is mediated through symbols which exist in themselves concurrent with the independent objects they represent. Predictive capability determines the veraciousness of a given symbol/set of symbols.

HNNNNNNNNG

>1 person hilariously misreads the easiest section of CPR and nobody notices (to the contrary)

>Ecological arguments can be used to extend that infinitely. Hilariously enough. these arguments are all largely based in medieval philosophy and theology.

Could you expand on this?

Where and what are these 5 seconds?

I suppose Descartes would say you don't have one, since a gf is material and the material world doesn't exist.

Or can I? Huehuehue....

>is only possible
why do you really on your imagination to talk about the other 5 senses?