There is no way to know whether the world truly exists outside our experience. We only have access to phenomena that is, to what appears to consciousness in sensible and conceptual forms.

Unless you've got some way to experience phenomena outside of your human shell I suggest you get comfortable with your limited reality and make the best of it.

>>24471734
there must be some way of transcending experience.

>>24471740
Death

>>24471747
How do you know

>>24471754
It must be the only way, for there is no alternative. Trust, wait and hope.

>>24471747
>t. ghost

It's much worse than that, anon. Not only can you not be sure that anything outside of you and your experiences exist, but you can't even trust that your experiences are accurate. It could be the case that an evil demon is faking all of your experiences. In fact, the only thing that you can't doubt is that you yourself exist, because you are a thinking thing.

>There is no way to know whether the world truly exists outside our experience
I know but I'm not telling you how

>>24471747
Death is simply the erasure of our consciousness, we've been dead(unborn) and will be dead(born) for the infinity of time, we must enjoy this little not even century we have but NO human species managed to make living as complex and as suffering as possible!

>>24471775
oh no no no no no. So if I stop thinking I can just die???????????

>>24471732 (OP)
There is. Your mistake is acting like there is a perspective outside of the theoretical conceptual schemes that are socially formed and that can be as directly known as our conceptual schemes. But those conceptual schemes necessitate the existence of some external stimulus to get going.

>subject-object dichotomy
hilarious
>noumena-phenomena divide
a grand joke

>>24471813
This post smells of curry

>>24471775
>because you are a thinking thing.
the purported identity of our awareness with thoughts or the thinking faculty is itself a dubious proposition

>>24471784
Pre birth and post death could be two diffrent states it need not be the same state of being.

>>24471732 (OP)
>There is no way to know whether the world truly exists outside our experience.
And /lit/ scoffs when I tell them philosophy is mental auto-fellatio for fools who don't know the truth.

>>24473073
like you do lol

>There is no way to know whether this made up concept truly exists outside another made up concept. We only have access to another made up concept that is, to what appears to made up concept in sensible and conceptual made up concept.
Philosophical progress everyone.

>>24471732 (OP)
There isn’t anything that’s either directly or indirectly unintelligible. Whether it’s some sensation, or a pure thought, neither are really outside the domain of general experience (not perception mind you, but self-aware subjectivity). If something exists, it’s predicable, meaning it’s a subject/substance that can have predicates. If something exists, it has to have properties. Thats the bare condition of being an existing something. The unknowable is that which doesn’t exist. There might be something that we don’t know right now, incomprehensible from our present standpoint, but that’s only our problem thought wise; it doesn’t say anything about the knowability of the object (all that can be said is that it is “not-yet-known”).

>>24471732 (OP)
all you need is faith

>>24474663
Yep, if you've got faith, you don't need brains.