Second rate philosophy is so boring. Let's just stick with the second point:
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by A conciousness needs something to percieve. an existance. Therefore, in order for Conciouness to exist, Existance must exist.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>The first premise, 'consciousness needs something to perceive', is not demonstrated. It is easily refuted by the brain in the vat thought experiment, leaving you with the assumption that consciousness requires existence. Your argument then looks like, "if we assume existence exists, then we can prove that existence exists." This is a fairly straightforward circular tautology and demonstrates precisely nothing beyond your own subjective assumption regarding the existence of existence.
Now, let's take a look at an interesting comment:
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by (Ayn Rand in Playboy @ 1964) Objectivism tells you that you must not accept any idea or conviction unless you can demonstrate its truth by means of reason.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>Use reason to demonstrate the truth of 'conciousness needs something to percieve' and I will admit that objectivism is correct.