Can the mind think about non-existing things?

[Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win]

I'll frame my question in three parts:

1) What is a non-existing thing?
2)Is it limited only to physical existence?
3) Can the mind think about non-existing things?

 

[Code-Monkey]

I'll frame my question in three parts:

1) What is a non-existing thing?
2)Is it limited only to physical existence?
3) Can the mind think about non-existing things?

Logic also exists.

 

[Eudaimonist]

1) What is a non-existing thing?

As Aristotle pointed out, "to be, is to be something". This means that everything that exists has attributes, and this is what it means for something to exist. Attributes imply behaviors -- we know that something exists because something is happening.

If one claims that a thing exists, and yet nothing is happening that would indicate the existence of that thing, we conclude (perhaps tentatively) "it doesn't exist". The word "it" is a mere placeholder for what was claimed to exist.

2)Is it limited only to physical existence?

I'm not certain what it could mean for existence to be non-physical. I see the mind as having physical reality, even though it is not a "solid thing". I don't make a distinction between physical and mental realities. (I'm not a dualist.)

3) Can the mind think about non-existing things?

Of course, and this happens all the time at these boards.

Note that thoughts exist as mental phenomena, but the referents of those thoughts (the things we imagine we are thinking about) might not exist.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Logic also exists.

As a method of thought, yes.

 

[AFallingStar]

I'll frame my question in three parts:

1) What is a non-existing thing?
2)Is it limited only to physical existence?
3) Can the mind think about non-existing things?

I think the mind definitely can think about non-existing things. That's the reason we're as advanced a society as we are...because inventors/innovators thought of things that didn't exist. A lot of things at one time were non-existing.

The second question, if a non-existing thing is limited only to physical existence...I'm not sure. What other kind of existence is there besides physical existence? I think existence is pretty well-defined...either something exists or it does not...

 

[Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win]

I don't make a distinction between physical and mental realities. (I'm not a dualist.)

Me neither.

Of course, and this happens all the time at these boards.

Note that thoughts exist as mental phenomena, but the referents of those thoughts (the things we imagine we are thinking about) might not exist.

I would like to ask one more question.

Can the mind think of something which, as a whole has no proof for its existence, and whose parts(constituents) also have no proof for their existence?

 

[Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win]

The second question, if a non-existing thing is limited only to physical existence...I'm not sure. What other kind of existence is there besides physical existence? I think existence is pretty well-defined...either something exists or it does not...

Those that are not verified by the senses but exist only as a thought in the mind.

 

[Code-Monkey]

As a method of thought, yes.

Do thoughts exist any less than fruits?

I've been watching the matrix too much lately and thinking about how you would program the universe. Everything that goes into the program "exists". And everything that is necessary to run the program "exists". And of course if there is a programmer, then he would logically exist too, and so forth...

Logic is a necessary component of a universe IMO.

I would think the easiest thing we can agree upon is the fact that all of the objects within the universe exist. So apples on a tree exist.

Then some folks probably stop there. But others I think might also suggest that there is some natural law or force that exists. An apple falls to the ground. That "code" or natural law that causes it to fall to the ground either exists as a property of the apple, as a property of mass or something else in general, or is simply just a part of the code of the universe. If it doesn't exist, then the apple doesn't fall. If it exists, then the apple can fall.

What about invisible unicorns? We don't think they exist in a physical form, but as soon as someone thinks about it, is the existence within the mind any less real than the existence of the thought of a fruit? Do thoughts exist? If thoughts exist, which I think we all agree that we have thoughts, then it would seem that invisible unicorns do in fact exist within our thoughts.

 

[Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win]

Let me be more clear.

I agree a 'green elephant' does not exist.
And likewise many other things.

Is there an example of a non-existing thing which can be thought of without using any other thing that we already know?

Or, are non-existing things just permutations and combinations of already existing things?

 

[Merlin]

Yes, the mind can think of/about 'non-existant' things.
It may not understand though.

 

[variant]

I can not only think of, but act on behalf of non-existent things. The mind is free to think in possibilities, which in actuality may never come to fruition.

I pay home owners insurance because a fire "might" happen.

I pay car insurance because I "might" be in a car accident.

I pay health insurance for the fact that I may get sick.

I lock my door though few people ever try to gain access.

The dangers are actually quite real, but not "actual realities", simply "possible realities".

Planning and foresight are part of the human experience, though, in actuality most things one plans for in ones life doesn’t come to pass.

I can think of things that don't exist outside my mind, like green elephants, and they certainly have an existence in my mind (as part of my imagination), but they do not exist (as far as I know) outside my mind.

So, your thoughts exist, in and of themselves, they simply do not necessarily correspond to any physical actuality, or probability.

 

[Osiris]

I can think of things that don't exist outside my mind, like green elephants, and they certainly have an existence in my mind (as part of my imagination), but they do not exist (as far as I know) outside my mind.

well, i don't know if this is what the OP meant (what i am about to say)...

but green exists... and elephant exists... all your brain is doing is putting two existing things together.

i don't think there is anything our brain can think of which isn't derived by impressions..

 

[Code-Monkey]

Another question is are there any existent things outside of the mind? Does any of it really exist or is it all simply thoughts running through our head?

 

[Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win]

well, i don't know if this is what the OP meant (what i am about to say)...

This is exactly what I meant.

but green exists... and elephant exists... all your brain is doing is putting two existing things together.

Yep, that's what I meant.

i don't think there is anything our brain can think of which isn't derived by impressions..

I tend to agree with your opinion.

What are the existing things that someone put together to think of 'God'?

It is my opinion that we put together all the superlative attributes of mankind and come up with a concoction called 'God'.

 

[Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win]

Another question is are there any existent things outside of the mind? Does any of it really exist or is it all simply thoughts running through our head?

My personal(philosophical) opinion would be answer that its all in my head.

But I wish to point out the distinction between things that can be verified by the senses and things that exist only in the mind.

 

[variant]

well, i don't know if this is what the OP meant (what i am about to say)...

but green exists... and elephant exists... all your brain is doing is putting two existing things together.

i don't think there is anything our brain can think of which isn't derived by impressions..

Yes, our ability to imagine is based on what images we experience.

We do however use logical twists to imagine the opposites of things.

We have concepts like "non-existence" or "nothingness" for instance which no one has ever experienced; it is just the logical opposite of our experience.

We know some things have opposites though, and we say things "exist" so combining them still works from our experience

 

[variant]

Another question is are there any existent things outside of the mind? Does any of it really exist or is it all simply thoughts running through our head?

How would this sort of viewpoint explain things we don't expect to happen like car accidents and people accidentally stepping out in front of a bus?

An objective nature to reality works better when explaining how what we do not expect to happen happens.

 

[Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win]

If anyone just replied to my last post, please excuse me since I went back and edited it, to rephrase it.

 

[Osiris]

We do however use logical twists to imagine the opposites of things.

We have concepts like "non-existence" or "nothingness" for instance which no one has ever experienced; it is just the logical opposite of our experience.

well, perhaps this could be an explanation:

there is a bag full of gumballs on the table.
he leaves for five minutes and comes back and the bag is empty (or there is nothing in the bag).

in this case, there being no gumballs in the bag rather than some gumballs in the bag is an impression... thus the concept of "nothing"...

similarly, one could see all matter as 'gumballs'... and apply "no gumballs rather than some gumballs" to all of matter or existence.

and yes... that could amount to applying opposite in some way.... but through sense experience.

 

[Osiris]

Another question is are there any existent things outside of the mind? Does any of it really exist or is it all simply thoughts running through our head?

reading Descartes lately?