From: nospam@example.net   
      
   On Wed, 12 Mar 2025, Richmond wrote:   
      
   >> Has anyone ever managed to present evidence to the contrary? If not,   
   >> we are very justified in knowing that the world exists.   
   >   
   > I don't think that it would be possible to prove that something doesn't   
   > exist, or provide evidence of such. On the other hand, existence is a   
      
   Again I must mind my language. _Disproving_ the physical world does not mean   
   proving that it doesn't exist, although in some logical/weird way it might be   
   possible although I cannot see how.   
      
   You could prove for instance, that we live in a simulation, or are brains in   
   vats, or thoughts in gods mind.   
      
   If you prove that, you have "disproven" the physical world, and shown that it   
   was just an illusion or misunderstanding in favour of something else.   
      
   Does that make more sense?   
      
   > strange word. As Hume pointed out, you cannot conceive of anything   
   > without conceiving of it existing. So to say the table exists doesn't   
   > say anything more than saying I have perceived it.   
   >   
   > I think the idea of existence comes from the idea of presence (origin:   
   > 'to be at hand'), and non-existence from absence (origin: to be away).   
   >   
   > So, the idea of the external world being non-existent is pretty much   
   > meaningless.   
      
   This is an excellent argument in favour of the external world. Maybe this will   
   close the book for good on idealism. ;)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)