5 philosophical questions: answer them!
Somebody else was doing this (but with 10) and it went well, so I may as well, too. My questions will be a bit bigger, though. Answer in the comments.
1. Zeno used paradoxes to argue that motion doesn't exist, including his arrow paradox. "It works by taking a snapshot of an arrow at a point (either in space or in time) in its flight. At that point, and at every other, the arrow is motionless. If there is no point, spatially or temporally, at which the arrow is moving, though, then the arrow is motionless. Contrary to appearances, an arrow in flight cannot move." [source: http://www.logicalparadoxes.info/arrow/] Does motion exist? If yes, how is Zeno's paradox solved?
2. Without resorting to circular reasoning, how do you know you can reason correctly?
3. There are two theories of time: A-theory states that the present is objectively present, and time actually progresses. B-theory states that all time is layer out on some plane and our motion through it is an illusion of the human consciousness. Which is true and why?
4. Without answering "because it's moral," why should a person be moral?
5. Prove that a mind (soul) does or doesn't exist.
I have my own answers to these, but I want to see what others write. Good luck!
1)As I answered in my reply on your comment, time only exist as a concept. Any any given moment there are things that has happened (Eg: Yesterday) and the things that has not happened but is set to happen (Eg: Tomorrow or the ringing of an alarm)
When somebody is refereeing to time, it's actually a chronology. The things we see are not the things that exist but things that are processed by the mind. Eg: A color blind person sees differently. An animal sees differently.
The colors are a construct based on the wavelength of light(Electromagnetic Waves). The time is a construct based on chronology.
2)How do you know that you are "You"?I'm an Instrumentalist (www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Instrumentalism) Reasoning gives results; therefor I use it. It's just a tool and I have no regards for it actually being true or if it can be proven to be true or any such thing. It's a tool that work. That's it.
3)See my answer to 1)
4)I'm moral agnostic. Morality is a second order concept. It's not much different from law. Based on the actions and consequences both law and morality can be good or bad. If the laws result in positive consequences; be lawful. Same goes for morality. How does it work? What function does it serve?
5)What if we only exist because we think we exist. There is no permanent soul/essence. The mind always change like a river or an ocean and it is a quantum event. It exist when you observe. (https://steemit.com/blog/@vimukthi/can-you-solve-this-riddle-on-human-observation) There is a river but it's not really the river. Hopefully I'm not being too confusing :-)
You say time exists only as a concept, which would mean it doesn't exist as a reality. Yet, in your next sentence, you say that the future hasn't yet happened, which would only be true if (A-theory) time was true. Either there's an inconsistency or I don't understand your model of time (or non-time).
It's a tool that works, you say. But how do you know that it works? We return to the circle.
See 1
"...morality can be good or bad." Isn't that a self-contradiction? Morality is a form of law. It seems that everybody (except sociopaths) believes morality should always be followed. Some claim otherwise (it seems to be what you're doing) but when questioned about it, actually do believe morality ought to be followed. Why follow a law if there's nobody to enforce it?
"What if we only exist because we think we exist[?]" But, in order to think one exists, one must first exist. Non-existing entities cannot perform actions (think). Then, if your question were answered in the affirmative, nobody could ever come into existence. Also, I don't think you really proved anything (which is fine), you just offered suggestions.
1)Colors don't exist but electromagnetic waves does. Time doesn't exist but chronology does. It's like the water in a mirage. The water isn't there but the process that make it appear so exists.
2)Actions and consequences. Does it get stuff done? If you desire an outcome and you gained that outcome, then it works. Stick with it. If it doesn't work, leave it.
4)Morality is just a word which many groups use to define different things. Christian morals are different from the Islam ones. why should a person be moral? is not different from asking why should a person be lawful? why should a person be respectful? why should a person be a liberal? etc. Saying that a person should follow morality is like saying that a person should be lawful. The Nazi soldiers were being lawful. The policemen who made sure the blacks didn't use the wrong seat or the wrong bathroom were following the law. The CPS is following the law. Morality is just a word people slap on things that they think they ought to follow. Anything beyond the NAP is an unnecessary complication without value.
5)I come from the Relational Quantum Mechanics side (Zero worlds Interpretation)which can be summed up as:
Fields in empty space have physical reality; the medium that supports them does not.
In the same manner,
Correlations have physical reality; that which they correlate does not.
If you show me nothing, you are still showing be something. Existence is a chicken-egg dilemma. Existence is a process. The moon is only there when you observe it. You only exist when you are perceiving the said existence.