I don't understand...
Surely the whole thing about philosophy is that you question so called given 'knowns'....part of the debate the Matrix brought to popular consciousness was should you just accept what appears to be...not so much 'are we all clones in tanks' but what does it mean to be alive/functioning human being/active participant in life i.e. not just a drone and a consumer...

Also, can I just ask...why do you have to be a fucking idiot to question what we perceive to be reality? I dont understand why that's a college knob type of discussion... :(
( curvylittlegoth heard the voices in your head on, Tue 1 Sep 2009, 0:26, 1 reply)

see below
but in this case because the proposed alternative is currently impossible, anyone with a grounding in physics and computing understands that.

You're questioning perception of reality but based on another scientific premise. So if you don't understand enough about the science concerned to see the flaws in that, then you're starting from a pretty silly position. You might just as well propose that the entire universe is contained in the kitchen table-leg of a giant called Terry. Effectively without the scientific background you know no more or less about the starting position of your hypotheis and it's no more or less likely that Bostrum's theory, it's just that Bostrum drops in more philosophical smoke and mirrors.

And personally, I don't think anyone is in the position to question what we perceive to be reality, until they actually completely know all there is to know about what we perceive to be reality, and I sure as fuck don't. do you think anyone else does?
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Tue 1 Sep 2009, 10:39, closed)