I Like Philosophy
As it relates to the nature of being, "who" or "what" is it that posits the questions of its own matrix structure? Who is that witnessing self within? The perceiver of the perceived - the I AM; I am having a thought. I am having a feeling. I am seeing. I am believing. I am doubting...
A lot of us would think that to doubt our own existence disqualifies us from existing, but it actually verifies it further - if not to solidify it firmly in place. You can't doubt you exist and then not exist simultaneously, for obvious reasons. So quite clearly, there is "something" at the essence of our experiences which has this strange ability to doubt if it's all actually happening or not - to doubt if it's even real.
If our minds were that of mere computers, the question of our programming would never need enter the equation - nor logically, could it. It's quite possible then, that such a question - that of sincere and honest doubt - reflects a form of reasoning which doesn't follow on or need logic at all, but actually stands outside the paradigm entirely and is able to question the very fabric from which it is supposedly made. A transcendent kind of knowing - very much "outside" of what you would typically expect from something which was only the sum of its own parts.
It's not unlike a computer suddenly asking questions about who built it or why. Not very typical at all - if not to warrant serious consternation on our part.
A lot of us would think that to doubt our own existence disqualifies us from existing, but it actually verifies it further - if not to solidify it firmly in place. You can't doubt you exist and then not exist simultaneously, for obvious reasons. So quite clearly, there is "something" at the essence of our experiences which has this strange ability to doubt if it's all actually happening or not - to doubt if it's even real.
If our minds were that of mere computers, the question of our programming would never need enter the equation - nor logically, could it. It's quite possible then, that such a question - that of sincere and honest doubt - reflects a form of reasoning which doesn't follow on or need logic at all, but actually stands outside the paradigm entirely and is able to question the very fabric from which it is supposedly made. A transcendent kind of knowing - very much "outside" of what you would typically expect from something which was only the sum of its own parts.
It's not unlike a computer suddenly asking questions about who built it or why. Not very typical at all - if not to warrant serious consternation on our part.
26-30, M