19 Answers

  1. If the whole world is an invention of the brain, why didn't it create it perfect for itself? Why did you create all this suffering, privation, and desire if you could create eternal bliss?

  2. This is certainly true… Well, or at least in philosophy it is not customary to say so right away – but you need to prove everything, okay – then let's assume that this is so. Then all the causal connections in the observed reality are laid down by this very brain activity, and everything real in itself is a consequence of the work of consciousness – therefore, consciousness itself is real: no less than the illusion it creates. You can, of course, replace here that it was about the brain, and not about consciousness – but ” brain “here is only a supposed correlate to consciousness in the system of the very” fictional world ” that we are looking for a basis for. So, if the world becomes real through the work of the brain, and the brain itself is part of this world (this repeatedly reproduced in the experiment), then the brain is the cause also of the existence of himself – or rather it would be to say that the reason for such is not the brain as a physical object (among other items), and his activities – which consists in inventing – that is, in fact, it is consciousness (as a process, and together as a substance).

    Any of our answers will be understood by your brain as you want. Maybe for refutation, and maybe for confirmation. The question itself has some kind of relation, and here the Spirit seems to approach the mirror: how do we want to see this world?

    This is a very important thought that everyone should come to on their own: there is only one Consciousness, so this is the right feeling. The only mistake is to assume that you are the only one who has such a status or who thought of such a thing. In reality, each subjective mind is an isolated mode of operation of the One, and there is no difference between the inner essence of all people. Only our individual experiences are different, as everyone is sitting in their own brain and in their own body. Our thoughts differ, most people are used to thinking of themselves as separate independent entities with their own interests and thoughts – but in reality, the interests of all beings in this universe coincide, because they are one being, and any thought about the same thing in different minds is not two different entities, but one and the same thought.

    What answer did I give in the end: did I confirm or disagree? Neither one nor the other – I suggested that you think about it and get closer to the truth. Any question had its own non-random basis. And if the question was “what if the surrounding objects actually really exist”? – it would also be possible to answer positively, simply referring to reasonable grounds in favor of such a judgment.

  3. Apparently, if this is so, then it is a collective one-time invention for everyone with the possibility of individual manifestation in it. And this is already the Creation of a higher consciousness

  4. Well, that is, in addition to “me” there is already some other entity called “my brain”. But what difference does it make, then, to call this entity other than myself “the world” or “my brain”?

  5. That's right. There is no way to verify the existence of objective reality, but the primary experience of “I am” does not need to be verified. You may even be a God, but you are only limiting yourself in the possibility of self-discovery.

  6. Elementary – if you oppose your mind to the device of the whole world. Thus, there is a situation when you want to become a protagonist of society. Then, in order not to destroy your theory, you need to express the idea that the brain of other people, in turn, creates its own special world. In which your personality is only a very small part. And to strengthen your existence, on the contrary, you need to say that your brain wants to break out of the world it has created, but it can't. And he needs someone's help)

  7. In a sense, it is true, and nothing can prove otherwise.

    But it has a Meaning, a Task, and a Freedom of Choice: it goes down based on what it came with, or it goes up, Changing what it brought, systematically and consistently…..

    The world will remain a fiction, but, from birth, I, as a child, am someone's fiction, when Choosing to Wake Up, I synergize with the Unity of Reality, becoming an Active Co-creator of the World.

  8. The philosopher Hume argued the same thing. 300 years ago. The whole world is a figment of my imagination. He was asked, i.e. if you close your eyes everything disappears? Yes. What about the Queen of England? He thought about it and said, ” It's just me and the Queen of England.” The rest is a figment of our imagination. You need to analyze the Matrix less .)

  9. This philosophy is not new. It's called solipsism. In short: the whole world is a complex of my feelings. Typical representatives of this philosophy: Berkeley, Hume, Mach, Avenarius. This philosophy is well discussed in the book “Materialism and Empirio-criticism” by V. I. Lenin.

    “There was a moment of madness when the feeling piano imagined that it was the only piano that existed in the world and that all the harmony of the universe took place in it.”

  10. It is more likely that the world is not a figment of anyone's brain at all, but exists by itself. And such theories are made up. Indeed, refute that the world exists by itself. This world has your brain, but it doesn't have your thoughts. It's more natural and real. And your theory is absurd. It assumes that the whole world is a figment of your brain, so your brain is your figment, so your figment is a figment of a figment. That is, there is nothing in the world but fiction! It's completely absurd!!!!

  11. This theory is not new, in fact it is subjective idealism-a philosophical trend, whose representatives deny the existence of any reality outside the subject's consciousness or consider it as something completely determined by the activity of this very consciousness.

  12. You are not the first to come up with this idea, there is a whole trend in philosophy based on this assumption (solipsism). Yes, this is not excluded and so far there is no way to check whether this is actually the case. And if so, then this question is, in general, insignificant, because if you can not measure or feel the difference, then these concepts (the world around you is real or the world around you is the fruit of your mind) are equivalent and it does not matter which one is implemented.

  13. This hypothesis can be tested by theoretical and practical means. The benefits of this hypothesis can be partial or complete, or zero.

    Only the Brain of Nature has opportunities and chances for such manipulations.

    Man is a part of Nature.

  14. If this is the case, then you will never know about it, so there is no point in loading these questions. Let these questions be asked by people who are paid for it, for example, philosophers.

  15. This question was solved by Kant. There is a thing in itself and we will never know what it is, but there are our impressions of this thing. That is, something outside of us exists, but we will never be able to find out what exactly, because according to Kant, even space and time are properties of the mind, and not of the world around us.

    This was also mentioned by Plato in his famous allegory about the cave. In a more modern interpretation, it might sound like this: imagine that you are inside a ball, this ball is covered with pixels on the inside, like a monitor. When something touches this ball from the outside, pixels with the corresponding image light up inside the ball. For example, if someone touches the ball with the palm of their hand, you will see a palm print inside the ball. If it does, you'll see a footprint. But you will never see that both the palm and the print are parts of the same person. Similarly, our brain constructs our reality from electrochemical signals that come from the senses, but how much this world of ours corresponds to the real world we will never know. Everything we see is just phenomena.

    In our time, science has found a way to test these theories and confirm them. This is very well explained in the series of popular science films ” The Brain with David Eagleman “(available on Youtube)

  16. Come on…, try to IMAGINE that my answer is NOT here!
    It doesn't work, … push harder.
    There are two options:
    a) You are wrong;
    b) You are not the master of your brain, and it has NO benefit to deceive you.
    Good luck!

  17. Well, in fact, it is. You live in a projection of the world created by your brain. What's funny is that there are no methods to prove or disprove the existence of something outside of this projection, or of the brain itself that creates the projection. And who told you that your projection has to hide something from you? She can directly declare that everything around her is an illusion. There is no reliable evidence anyway

  18. There is only one thing that can be proved absolutely reliably – the existence of oneself. This is proved from the logical statement -” You can doubt everything, except that you can doubt everything.” Accordingly, that which doubts is the Self that really exists. This, in turn, can mean anything, that the world is a matrix, an invention of the brain, a dream, an astral plane, a simulation-as far as the imagination allows. Personally, I take as objective what is logical or reasonable and generally accepted, in some terry solipsism for me there is no sense.

  19. This is the so-called theory of solipsism . No, you may well actually be a real mind . Just think for yourself how unhealthy you are to come up with THIS) �

    And so there are refutations of this theory, when not only the world is an illusion of our consciousness, but also the self of “our” consciousness too . At the same time, there is also evidence that if we do not see something and we do not need it, it is equivalent to the fact that it is not there – so it is with the whole world .

Leave a Reply