Kowani wrote:Daarwyrth wrote:Every single concept we know of is thought up by humans. A dog is a dog because a human created that concept. We tend to stick the label "pet" to it or "friend", but a different lifeform that evolved under completely different circumstances might perceive a dog as cattle, food or something alien to us. In those same lines, what may seem rules of formal logic to humans may be complete gibberish to another intelligent lifeform. It's all subjective and it's good to keep that in mind. Because dealing in absolutes is folly.
Well, no. A dog (a better example would be a wolf, since dogs require humans to exist.
) would not cease to be a dog if humans ceased to exist. The concept of
dog would not exist, no, but concepts are arbitrary, whereas physical reality is not. (Perception is irrelevant, so don’t try that route.) The argument is not that they could not exist. The argument is that since we have no proof that they do, we have to assume the negative.
Perception means everything when it comes to subjects like this. The same thing will never appear the same when viewed from two sides. Yes, we may have a similar concept for it, but it will never be viewed the same way by both individuals. Physical reality may dictate that a living, breathing and material creature stands before you, but what it is and means is entirely filled in by what perspective you stand in. But heck, even physical reality may appear differently to another lifeform, or better, they may perceive it differently. But does that mean they're wrong and humans would be right? Absolutely not, hence I return to my previous statement, that everything is subjective.
I understand your point of view and to a degree would find myself in agreement, but I simply get weary when people start "the rules of this or that dictate thus or so", because all those rules are nothing more but other people's thoughts. You can agree or disagree with them, but when people start to take them as absolute, undeniably true rules, my eyes start rolling