Suppose you were to start over.

[melon]

And now for a notoppings-like thread.

Suppose you were to let go of everything you believe, everything you think you know, all your opinions (be they logical, emotional, political, religious, what you think of your dog, etc.), your personal goals - essentially becoming a blank slate. If you were to start over in such a manner, what would be the first few things that you would believe? Why? What would be the criteria for forming these beliefs? (Would you form beliefs that are intuitively appealing, or emotionally appealing, or accepting information from the senses as true, or forming beliefs that are logically derived using beliefs obtained through other means as the premises, or that are pragmatic, or some other criteria?) What would follow from these initial beliefs? Would these differ from the beliefs you currently hold? (Is the question even answerable?) Why? If so, does this make you reevaluate your current beliefs?

As most of you probably know, the most famous example of this occurring is by Rene Descartes, who made an attempt at "starting over" and finding a truth he could prove without any doubt whatsoever. Wikipedia probably explains it better than I could, so I'll paste it:

Initially, Descartes arrives at only a single principle: thought exists. Thought cannot be separated from me, therefore, I exist. Most famously, this is known as cogito ergo sum (Latin: "I think, therefore I am"). Therefore, Descartes concluded, if he doubted, then something or someone must be doing the doubting, therefore the very fact that he doubted proved his existence. "The simple meaning of the phrase is that if someone is wondering whether or not he exists, that is in and of itself proof that he does exist."

Would you go about this in a similar fashion as Descartes, and, if so, how would you expand upon that initial belief? You don't need to answer all (or any, really) of the questions posed above, and there aren't any wrong answers (that I'm aware of :laugh:); I wrote them only to set the general direction of the thread and to start a hopefully interesting discussion.

[ame]

survival is the primary interest of all creatures, however we pretty ourselves up in our minds.

i would start with whatever is available to facilitate living for myself according to environment then when emotional progression starts to involve another...whatevers available to facilitate living for both of us and it grows from thence.
people will accept whatever reality they're dealt and work with it from there.
if born under an oppressive religious regime i would probably be religious etc.
if i think up more i'll add to this.

[metamagnet]

this seems like a self-defeating question.
your predictions as to what you will be like as a "blank slate" is all dependent on how you have come to perceive things now, even the nature of the question itself

[SongofSeptember]

this seems like a self-defeating question.
your predictions as to what you will be like as a "blank slate" is all dependent on how you have come to perceive things now, even the nature of the question itself

Precisely. How could one predict what they were to believe if all of one's current beliefs were wiped away, as that prediction would rely on one's current perception?

If we were to, however, you would need to take into consideration thousands of variables; your environment, living circumstances, society, etc.

It is an interesting question, however.

[Chucklebug]

If you lost all your beliefs and memories it would be like having global amnesia. I watched a documentary a while ago about someone who experienced this and in many ways his personality was completely different while many of his preferences such as his taste in music stayed the same. As to what beliefs you would form in this condition? If say you got a brain wipe and you still lived amongst civilisation, personally I think it would be very confusing. It would be like getting lost in a foreign city. You wouldn't be able to form beliefs at first until you find someone to explain to you what had happened and what all the buildings and roads were there for. Or perhaps if you didn't ask anyone - say if you didn't understand their language - you would have to observe closely and use your natural thinking abilities to infer what all this is about, for eg. watching people buy food in a supermarket, you must have some shiny round things to give to the person who provides that food before you are allowed to eat. Then physical needs would have to be seen to and with the knowledge that you had gleaned from either asking people or observing, you would find a way to do this. The point I'm making is that you would have no choice but to confront the world at face value only and you would have to trust what others had told you. Only until you probably later on realise that some of the things people told you were lies and some of the things you observed were facades will you be able to formulate your own beliefs and opinions.

I wonder how would you think? Would you think in a particular language at all, if your brain had been completely wiped? I don't think you would think in the sense we usually mean. It would just be a feeling and if you wanted to communicate that you were hungry it would be similar to how a baby communicates - by crying and probably some pretty embarrassing begging. Ugh that would be awful, I hope my mind never gets wiped no matter how many amazing new ideas I get!

[zibber]

Pfff.. this is a doozy.

With Descartes, I always wonder whether a "clean" human would immediately assume the existence of a (perfect) creator, or if Descartes was just rationalising his culturally established belief (existing prior to his philosophy). Well, I'm sure a concept like "perfect" wouldn't come into play, but that's little more than a guess.

I suppose that, if we look back very far, we may assume that some kind of vague, all-encompassing animism would be the most plausible.