Knowledge, belief & agnosticism (Agnosticism)

by David Turell , Monday, March 24, 2008, 01:07 (6087 days ago) @ whitecraw

"Second: There is no sense in which the universe could be said to exist if there was no 'consciousness' present to perceive it. This is because whatever sense such utterances have is dependent on language and its significations. The idea that the universe exists only has meaning within a matrix of signs, symbols and grammatical rules; therefore, without the apprehension of language ('consciousness' in mentalistic or psychologising terms), the very notion of 'a universe' that 'exists' would be utterly meaningless. In other words, the existence of a universe outside our apprehension of it is unsayable (i.e. 'inconceivable' in psychologising terms)." - I am totally confused by this concept. Given that the universe is 13.7 billion years old and humans and their consciousness did not appear until the past few million years, and language even more recently, perhaps the past few hundred thousand years ago, does that mean that the universe really didn't exist for 13.7 billion years, until we appeared to be aware of it, to think about it, and talk about it? Or am I to interpret the word 'exist' as meaning conscious recognition of the existence of something or object before it can be said to exist.