I don't mind stealing bread

[Sithis]

<p>

1.) Reality exists outside of the realm of human perception.

It seems very likely that this is true. You, however, are arguing that reality exists outside of human perception in exactly the same way that it exists within human perception.</p>

<p>

Wishful thinking doesn’t change the way things are. Even if I manage to convince myself that a pile of money is sitting in front of me, it changes nothing.

Never said that it would.</p>

<p>

You’re again using the adjective “human” as if to denote some higher level of consciousness - something roughly akin to a deity. What you’re ultimately doing is making the argument that, because the human mind is fallible, abandoning it to agnostic mysticism will somehow make it infallible.

No, I am not. This paragraph doesn’t really make sense; I feel like you are just making things up and attributing them to me.</p>

<p>

3.) The law of identity doesn’t exist because it’s “pragmatic”. It exists because our consciousness identifies the fact that a table is a table - a TV a TV - a computer a computer - and humanity, humanity.

Oh, so the law of identity DOES depend on human perception now? I am saying that we believe in it because it is pragmatic within the context of the human experience to believe that my TV is a TV and not a pile of leaves.</p>

<p>

4.) Go jump off of a building. Perhaps it’s only our human perception that the ground is there, and that we’ll die by hitting it. If you’re right, you can come back and tell me about it. If you’re wrong, then it’s not much of a loss. =P

Nah, I’m not that adventurous of a person. Still, that was rather rude. My point is that human perception is what we have, so it would not be pragmatic for me to ignore that gravity exists and jump off a building. You however, presume to talk about things and phenomena existing outside of human perception in terms of absolute certainty.</p>

<p>

P.S. You’re also throwing us into a logically fallacious cycle of infinite regression of the form “but how do you know X”.

Explain this. Explain how asking people to explain their beliefs is a logical fallacy.</p>

<p>

P.S.S. If you’re trying to pull the metaphysical subjectivism argument based on “human perception”, I’d like it noted that there’s no logical reason why our perception would be distorted unless some “higher power” deliberately set it to be that way.

What do you mean “distorted”?</p>