Thread: Shared Dreaming Counter-Argument

I am not sure if you guys quite understand what I am trying to say. I am not in any way denying that any of these things exist. Well, let's take an imaginary object called "A". Then there are "B" and "C". We have proof that B exists, and we have proof that C does not exist. So B is in the realm of existing things and C is in the realm of non-existing things. We have no proof that A exists, and we have no proof that A doesn't exist. That puts A neither in the realm of existing things or non-existing things. There is no reason to believe in A, because there are literally infinite things like it that you have just as good reason to believe in. To do so would be absolutely random and illogical. Now take the object "D". We have no proof as to whether D exists, but there is a reason to believe it. Maybe you think it is cool, or maybe you have some evidence but it is not definitive. It is still not logical to believe in D in its current state, as it is still in the same group as A. This is a point where you might want to use the scientific method to take D and put it in the same group as B, or C, and then you will know its true state. But if you don't know the state of whether something exists, even if you have a reason to believe it, it is still illogical to believe it.

Originally Posted by Avian

I am not sure if you guys quite understand what I am trying to say.

Perhaps what you were trying to say was a bit different from what you actually said. I completely understood your posts and responded in complete accordance with the statements you had made. If I said something inappropriate or if you believe what I said doesn't apply, I would be interested to know.