A bit of fun

This is just for discussion. I would love to hear some comments from people. Here’s the issue:

Someone approaches you and states that yesterday never existed. In fact everything has only existed since 6am this morning.  When everything came into existence, it was already “pre-programmed” with the appearance of age and we were installed with our memories of non-existent past days.

Your goal is to attempt to prove them wrong.  How would you?  What would you say?

Advertisements

22 Comments

Filed under Debate, Pedantic

22 responses to “A bit of fun

  1. i’d throw them a death glare and call the men in white coats

    then poke my tongue out at them in their straight jacket and say ‘i win’

  2. Oh man, how would I go about this?

    My immediate thought would be try and find a photo or memory that I could prove hadn’t been altered, or something that might only be uniquely known to a few people so that the ‘pre-programmers’ wouldn’t have been able to change it.

    Failing that I’d show them my dirty washing pile, surely no one would go to that much trouble to fake the past!

  3. Dom

    Why would I want to? I just proves my theory that the universe was created as my plaything. 🙂 (sorry, God Complex day).

  4. I’d show them the big fuck off scar on the back of my hand… There is no way that the pain from having my hand obliterated between a van door and a generator was a made up pre-programmed fake memory…

  5. Isn’t the past just programming in a different form? Sorry. Not a helpful question to either side of the discussion really – just my thoughts.

  6. Oink

    I would walk very slowly away so to finish the conversation without challenging him/her – the nutter.

  7. I’d wave my tax bill at them and show them a picture of a graveyard. Solid proof of the past and the future. Then I’d throw dime bars at them.

  8. Sammy, argument by “Nerr ner” always wins.

    Perp and Soupy and Gumpher, perhaps your laundry\scar\taxation is simply an added layer of complexity to force you to accept the pre-programming?

    Dom, surely the God Complex only applies if you knew about it already?

    Brennig, a good point. Time having no properties of its own does mean that the past is relative.

    Mrs Piggermann, like you never talk to nutters….I’ve spoken to you before.

  9. mylozmom

    Oh I got a good one (maybe)……

    I’d ask them if that was the case then how did I get the HUGE scar on my belly from having a c-section when my daughter was born a year and a half ago??????

    HA!!!!!

  10. mylozmom

    I guess I should explain that a bit better. My reasoning is that Hannah’s existance is because we conceived her and she is definitly biologically mine sooooooo, that must mean that I carried her through pregnancy and pregnancy as we all know is approximatley 40 weeks.

    How’d I do?

  11. Oink

    Oh yeah – I’ve got another one. I’d say ‘I don’t care if that’s true or not – it makes no difference. I’ll still eat cake, shag, and do other very scurrilous things’. I’d also ask why they’re not content in the here and now – and then I’d tell them to prove it or shutfookoop.

  12. Mas

    The concept of time is an interesting one; how long have we been here for, how long will we remain? Should someone feel the need to make such a statement as to deny my existence in the recent past; well I should feel that the burden of proof is upon them rather than myself to substantiate. My belief in history, everything I see and hear – it is something that I have faith in. It is something very real and obvious to myself. Changing my fundamental belief structure to accept their faith as my own would take some doing; and changing their belief to that of my own – why should I? They are free to believe as they will, as am I.

    I like the idea of the Stephen King short story – “The Langoliers” where the present is created before it is needed (so you can be in the future waiting for the present to catch up and come into being), and the past is eaten by horrendous monsters (so you _do not_ want to be caught in the past!); but that too I guess is a cycle of renewal.

    To the man with severe memory loss, all he knows is that one moment there was nothing – the next (when he wakes up) there is everything; to him, the world and everything in it only existed the moment he opened his eyes. He has to take it on faith that it has always been here; that his waking had nothing to do with creation. He may not choose to accept that everything was here before. A concious decision has to be made to accept the unknown. He has to have faith that things he has no memory of experiencing happened.

    The world runs on faith. On our faith in ourselves. Right or wrong, we have developed a belief structure (ignoring deities here) in the world around us; trust and faith in everything our senses tell us, our experiences and memories tell us. Those things we cannot understand, we make a decision as to what we are going to do with them. Some list it under “God and other supreme beings”. Some wait for science to tell us answers. Some go “ah, what the hell, if I’m meant to know I’ll find out when the time comes”… and I think this is one of those situations. Most people would not have their belief system shaken by someone telling them something all experience tells them is false.

    However, many people would choose to validate their own beliefs rather than asking “why does this person think this way? What is it that they have seen or experienced that gives them this unique perspective?”

    The burden of proof; like I said when I started, is on them. It is up to us to decide if their alternative faith is superior / better than our own.

  13. Mumsy, perhaps the existence of the scar and ickle baby (not so ickle anymore) are simply further steps put in place by the programmers of the universe. Perhaps the pregnancy and memories were all faked just as everything else was.

    Oink, I like that answer, it doesn’t matter because even if it is faked it is all we’ve got so why not make the most of it.

    Mas, I’m not so sure that I agree that science is a form of faith. We can have faith that science can explain how the world works (or even cannot explain some things) but the scientific method is designed to weed out corruption by opinion or perception. Of course the assumption of the scientific method does preclude the existence of something like Plato’s cave or The Matrix where our perceptions actual cause the laws of science to function. I think we’re probably better off living as if there is no cosmic programmer, Plato’s cave or Matrix that we cannot prove or disprove.

  14. mylozmom

    Naaaaaaaaaa, THAT much pain and suffering could NOT be a fake memory………….no way, no how. And lhow do you explain that she has my DNA??? She either grew in my tummy or she cloaned. And if she was cloaned then that does take time too so…………………

    *waits to see if this makes a good arguement*

  15. Mumsy, your argument is comparable to saying that you exist and remember existing so you could not have been created this morning. However the assertion is that you and everything else was created, right down to your DNA and that of Hannah’s. Any programmer (for want of a better term) capable of doing that could conceivably also ensure that the DNA between the two of you were identical in enough places to indicate that you were mother and daughter. The pain is also now only a memory (I would hope) although a particularly intense one I imagine.

  16. mylozmom

    Crap! 😦

  17. On some days I could call bullshit on this. I’m up all night & don’t go to bed ’til after 06:00. Surely I’d have noticed coming into existence at 06:00. That may be a way to disprove the person. Find someone that starts work at 05:00 or who’s on a night shift the day this is meant to have happened.

  18. You know, I’ve had this ‘marked as new’ on bloglines since you wrote it with the hope of coming back to it and saying something relevant.

    I got nothin’, sorry.

  19. Nah. Me auld brain doesn’t stretch to philosophy these days. Sorry! 😉

  20. Curses! Can you comment on something without any philosophy in instead? I’ve just written a particularly witty and engaging piece on hedge trimming that I think you’ll find fascinating.

  21. Oh, that I could cope with, yes. I’ll be doing my blog catch up later. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s