Thread: There is no spoon.

Real, it exists in one form or another, even if somthing only exists in your thoughts, it exists.

We perceive it to exist through what our senses are telling us and it will always exist unless something disproves its existance.

But then again it comes back to the whole thing as to where you draw the line.

Good thread idea Carou.

Originally Posted by Volcon

Real, it exists in one form or another, even if somthing only exists in your thoughts, it exists.

So this means everything; even ideas are real?

So real=exists?





If so; then when i draw a spoon; is it a real spoon?

Well, you have to consider what the child was defining as "real."

Most apparently, he meant "real" as in, physically existing, in our known universe - the "spoon" as humans know a spoon to be.

In that case; no, there was no spoon. There was only a computer simulation of a spoon.

The physical world (the "desert of the real" as Morpheus called it) actually existed. The spoons that the crew were eating their slop with, on the ship, were real, as opposed to the spoon in the Matrix, which was just data.

Originally Posted by Carôusoul

So this means everything; even ideas are real?

So real=exists?





If so; then when i draw a spoon; is it a real spoon?

Gotta define real spoon, its defined as a spoon, not exactly the eating tool spoon, but in its self its real as a drawing spoon.

I suppose you could say that the spoons we experience aren't real anyway, using one definition. They're just groups of fuzzy metal atoms.

It is the human concept of something that makes it a solid, hard edged object. Therefore a spoon we encounter in a false reality is just as real.

You can view the objective universe as little bits of data. Atoms are only mathematical statements. In the same way a computer program also makes mathematical statements, just using transistors instead. It's a different language of reality; a word in French is as valid as a word in English. That's another way of looking at it.

Originally Posted by Xei

I suppose you could say that the spoons we experience aren't real anyway, using one definition. They're just groups of fuzzy metal atoms.

It is the human concept of something that makes it a solid, hard edged object. Therefore a spoon we encounter in a false reality is just as real.

You can view the objective universe as little bits of data. Atoms are only mathematical statements. In the same way a computer program also makes mathematical statements, just using transistors instead. It's a different language of reality; a word in French is as valid as a word in English. That's another way of looking at it.

It doesn't work like that.

That "group of fuzzy metal atoms" when put together, makes a "spoon."

When those real atoms are put together, it makes a real spoon, it doesn't matter if you call it that in French, English, whatever. It still makes the real object that is in question.

Real atoms are to a real spoon what computer data is to a virtual spoon, except for one major difference: one is made out of physical particles, the other is an electronic representation of former which doesn't exist outside of the computer.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

It doesn't work like that.

That "group of fuzzy metal atoms" when put together, makes a "spoon."

When those real atoms are put together, it makes a real spoon, it doesn't matter if you call it that in French, English, whatever. It still makes the real object that is in question.

Real atoms are to a real spoon what computer data is to a virtual spoon, except for one major difference: one is made out of physical particles, the other is an electronic representation of former which doesn't exist outside of the computer.

Atoms are electronic representations of physical particles which don't exist outside of accepted reality. There really isn't much that could be called 'physical' about physical reality. The closer we study the physical world, the more everything looks like just bits of information.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

Atoms are electronic representations of physical particles which don't exist outside of accepted reality. There really isn't much that could be called 'physical' about physical reality. The closer we study the physical world, the more everything looks like just bits of information.

I understand this but, according to the universally accepted "reality", (that is, the reality that we, so far, have labeled the "physical universe") there are these objects called "spoons." The child in the movie (which is what the question is about) is referring to a "real" spoon. (That is; the spoons that exist within the "physical" reality that is the world outside the Matrix.) When the child said "there is no spoon," he was saying "there is no physical/actual/familiar-idea-of/outer-world spoon." He wasn't taking the statement any further than that, to debate whether or not the spoons in the "desert of the real" were "really" physical or not. He was accepting that Neo knew exactly what spoons he was referring to.

In this case: No. There was no "spoon" in the Matrix. There was the illusion of a spoon.

Only from the frame of reference of our perceived "physical reality" can a spoon be called a "real" spoon. If it is not in that particular state, it is not a real spoon. It is something else. If we found out that this physical reality wasn't the "real" reality, we would have to rethink our definition of what a "real spoon" really is. Until that is done, a real spoon is the one that you and I eat our cereal with, in this; the "real" world.

Inside the matrix, as it were, was a frame of reference. Neo could 'bend' the spoon because he had left that frame of reference and the spoon was no longer real for him. The fact that it was designed by a computer does not negate the fact that every spoon he used up to the time of being ejected from his jelly like cocoon in the 'real' world was actually a real and useful spoon that brought food to his mouth.

Substantially, a spoon that is virtually constructed by a computer simulation that allows you to see touch taste smell and hear the effects of it in real time and also transports soup from a bowl to a mouth is no different than one in which these impulses are created by 'physical reality'.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

Inside the matrix, as it were, was a frame of reference. Neo could 'bend' the spoon because he had left that frame of reference and the spoon was no longer real for him. The fact that it was designed by a computer does not negate the fact that every spoon he used up to the time of being ejected from his jelly like cocoon in the 'real' world was actually a real and useful spoon that brought food to his mouth.

Substantially, a spoon that is virtually constructed by a computer simulation that allows you to see touch taste smell and hear the effects of it in real time and also transports soup from a bowl to a mouth is no different than one in which these impulses are created by 'physical reality'.

I disagree. Neo could bend the spoon, because it is just accepted (by just saying "spoon") that no one is talking about a real, physical spoon. They are talking about the illusion of a spoon. It is a given that didn't need to be elaborated on, within their conversation.

The spoon that Neo had been using, his entire life, was not a "real" spoon (in the sense of the word that the child was using). It was a simulation. The nutrition that Neo was getting in his body, to keep him alive, wasn't coming from "real" carrots, "real" peas, "real" noodles, "real" chicken. It was coming from the liquified dead remains of the other humans that the machines were harvesting. That's what was "really" going into his body.

However, to illustrate the point: in the "desert of the real," any peas and carrots on the ship would have been called "real." That is the comparison that the child was making, and, within that context, no, the spoon Neo bent was not real.

Real atoms are to a real spoon what computer data is to a virtual spoon, except for one major difference: one is made out of physical particles, the other is an electronic representation of former which doesn't exist outside of the computer.

It exists in the form of electrons in the microchips, however... making it just as objectively physical, no?

Oneironaut, they do imply that our idea of "real" is never real. In the Matrix sequels, 'The Kid' (the one who survived solely on faith from the animatrix) shouts to give Neo a "real" spoon before he took off essentially saving him from being stabbed in the back by Baine, the downloaded form of agent Smith, saying, "He said you'd understand..."

That was illustrating that our idea of coincidence or synchronistic moments aren't simply something to be written off as that. This theme ran rampant in the Matrix sequels. Once, with the bolt on the bridge breaking in real life, forcing trinity to go into the matrix which the oracle and the architect somehow foresaw. And again, with the oracle knowing Niobe would be able to pilot the tunnels and The Kid being able to pilot Mifune's mech to shoot open the gate just in the nick of time.

Therefore, what they were trying to illustrate was, there are times in so-called real life where we are the sole authors of reality and can manipulate things that we seemingly shouldn't be able to according to our shared laws.

Whether any of you believe me or not, I've been able to be the author of this reality on many a minor occasion and hardly believe it to be "real" due to those incredible moments.

I feel that the less you deem this reality real, the more lucid and in control of this reality you can become. I don't mean psi-balls or any of those things kids get infatuated with doing, I mean more along the lines of deja-vu and vision that stretches beyond our normal idea of time or something similar to remote viewing by knowing what people are doing before you should. Enough to have people doing double takes. Something that is all too common with me.

Originally Posted by Xei

It exists in the form of electrons in the microchips, however... making it just as objectively physical, no?

Yes. It makes it an objectively physical digital representation of the tangible object we know as a "spoon." It doesn't make it a real spoon, in the same sense that we identify a real spoon with.

What you're doing is essentially saying that, if I imagine a can, with my mind's eye, that there is a real can inside my head. This is incorrect. There is a real mental image of a can in my head. The two are not the same thing.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

Oneironaut, they do imply that our idea of "real" is never real. In the Matrix sequels, 'The Kid' (the one who survived solely on faith from the animatrix) shouts to give Neo a "real" spoon before he took off essentially saving him from being stabbed in the back by Baine, the downloaded form of agent Smith, saying, "He said you'd understand..."

That was illustrating that our idea of coincidence or synchronistic moments aren't simply something to be written off as that. This theme ran rampant in the Matrix sequels. Once, with the bolt on the bridge breaking in real life, forcing trinity to go into the matrix which the oracle and the architect somehow foresaw. And again, with the oracle knowing Niobe would be able to pilot the tunnels and The Kid being able to pilot Mifune's mech to shoot open the gate just in the nick of time.

Therefore, what they were trying to illustrate was, there are times in so-called real life where we are the sole authors of reality and can manipulate things that we seemingly shouldn't be able to according to our shared laws.

Whether any of you believe me or not, I've been able to be the author of this reality on many a minor occasion and hardly believe it to be "real" due to those incredible moments.

I feel that the less you deem this reality real, the more lucid and in control of this reality you can become. I don't mean psi-balls or any of those things kids get infatuated with doing, I mean more along the lines of deja-vu and vision that stretches beyond our normal idea of time or something similar to remote viewing by knowing what people are doing before you should. Something all too common with me.

All of that actually enforces exactly what I said "No, the spoon wasn't real."

I said that, to go forward and to question whether the physical reality is, in fact, physical reality is one thing that didn't have anything to do with the spoon that Neo bent. The kid was saying that the spoon that Neo was holding in his hand, at the time of bending it, wasn't really in his hand.

Yes, the story line does further the idea that the real world isn't without the possibility of manipulation, as well, but that is outside the scope of the question in the OP.

In the movie the neo holding the spoon and looking at it was not a real Neo either, just like the spoon was not real.

I thought the kid said for him to see himself in the spoon or something like that???

I don't know.

Originally Posted by NonDualistic

In the movie the neo holding the spoon and looking at it was not a real Neo either, just like the spoon was not real.

I thought the kid said for him to see himself in the spoon or something like that???

That's the next line in the quote. He says:

"Then you'll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself."

Meaning that, in doing what he told Neo to do, Neo would realize that he's not bending the spoon (in the real sense) he is only bending his own perception of the "spoon," from that of a "real" spoon, to that of a digital illusion which can be manipulated by him. He is learning.

The spoon was not real, just as the matrix. It was real inside the matrix, but outside, on the ship, no, the spoon was not real. Depending on where your point of refrence was (Where you think reality is, either the matrix or the earth) it can either be real or not real.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

That's the next line in the quote. He says:

"Then you'll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself."

Meaning that, in doing what he told Neo to do, Neo would realize that he's not bending the spoon (in the real sense) he is only bending his own perception of the "spoon," from that of a "real" spoon, to that of a digital illusion which can be manipulated by him. He is learning.

Thats what I thought.

To address the original question of this post, Its all real in my opinion, in my view or perception. The only thing that changes is the level of perception, and it is ones perception that determines the level of reality.
It is my opinion such works hand in hand, both in the movie theme and in "real life" as we all take it to be. In the movie one is a real person, flesh and blood, whos perception is stuck in a electronic matrix, a digital reality. When one shifts their perception to understanding and knowing ones physical body is "asleep" hooked through the mind into this digital environment then one can begin to mainpulate such a reality through the mind.
In "real life" the circumstances differ from the movie in that one must begin by realizing that there is no physical body. Such is a mental illusion created by the mind rather than a computer as in the movie.
Such a concept is difficult at best for most to grasp. All too many draw the conclusion that the physical brain is the mind, when in truth it is only a physical manifestation or representation of the mind itself. The whole concept of physical existance and limitations percieved from such is the first obstacle to overcome. Such is a cage built by the mnd itself, much like the movies concept of the mind taking the digital matrix to be reality.
Once that is grasped, then the question arises - if not a physical body what then am I? This is where , for me, the statement

" Then you'll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself."

begins to speak volumes.

The universe itself is just a computer, with infinite multi-threading capabilities and 100% efficient processors.