Thread: reality: how to explain reality

I'm not sure I get what you mean. Many people would say mythic creatures like gods and dragons aren't "real," but when talking about them you still have to stay within the boundaries of what people think those things are, so you don't have total control. If you invent a fiction, then you have more control, but even then you can't totally control what pops into people's heads when they encounter your made-up thing.

My own view is that anything that can be thought or referenced is real--it's a real idea, and has as good a shot at influencing world events as any physical object.

There is no real or unreal, there is only the interaction of matter and energy. You, your family, your mind, your emotions are just the interactions of matter and energy.

There's a major problem with this definition. I have complete control over myself, even in waking life. Does that make me not real?

The truth is, the human brain cannot perceive reality. Just perspectives on what it assumes to be reality.

Imagine something. Now imagine it's real. Is there any difference?

How do you figure brady baker? How can you say this with such certainty when all that you, or anyone else for that matter has been able to percieve is bundles of sensory data, how do you know what those bundles represent? How can you say with any degree of certainty that they represent what you say they do? How do you know your memory is accurate? By what magnificent and special power are you able to discern the nature of the outside universe? The universe may appear to work in one way, but as we all know, and as the topic of this website illustrates, appearances are often decieving.

Last night I was stalked by a winged devil, I saw it approach, but then I woke up in my bed. Was the winged devil there? Was it matter or energy? It certainly appeared to be there and made of matter. Maybe it was there and I woke up into a new life or something, we will never know and we can never know, so I suggest you stop forcing your beliefs on us(ironic since you are an adamant atheist), and except the fact that you, I, and everyone else are ignorant.

Whoa, whoa. That was an intense response Belisarius.

If you would ask first rather than going off the deep end, I'd be the first to tell you that I don't know anything. "True knowledge is unattainable". "The only thing that you can know is that you can't know anything". "The most knowledgeable man is a man who knows he knows nothing." I agree with all that. But it's pretty boring to argue about don't you think? It really isn't arguable at all, but then again, the way that "believers" phrase their arguments is pretty unarguable too. They can always just go back to, "because God said so!" and thats normally where their arguments do end up.

We can't know anything, but we can be pretty sure of some things. If you go through life with that outlook then what will you learn? What will you take away from the experience? Nothing.

For all I know, this world is some sick and twisted video game being played by spotted purple elephants in the umpteenth dimension of the linear quadratic space time continuum. But I do try to form some sort of intelligent idea of reality based on more simple and "plausible" explanations.

Sorry if I came off too harsh, it was more for the benefit of other "true believers" than to insult you.

I'm glad you understand that we can't know anything with any degree of certainty, it annoys me to no end when people deny this, especially when they base their arguements on statements like,"That's why it's called faith stupid!", and yet still argue it as known truth.

The only thing I would take issue with is your statement that some belief systems are more probable than others, I would say belief systems are either possible, or impossible and that there is no basis for arguing that one is any more correct than any other. One benefit that I see in this is that we can still have hope of heaven or still have hope in mauve elephants playing us as a computer game.

Reality... You know I've done some deep thinking about reality (as I'm sure everyone has) and it comes to my surprise how closely it is linked with time, existance, and mind.

For example:
Time/Reality=Existance/Mind

Now that probably makes little sense to you, if you want I can find my notes on the hypothesis... But seeing how I'm lazy right now I'll explain it as lathargically as possible, tell me if you agree. What is reality? It is truth, it is the flow of time on an abundant explanding force (aka- existance). Think of it as a Dna strand, it has limits and borders yet at the same time it grows and has an undying absorbsion for understanding opposing forces and processing them. Reality is logic, when we dream and break this logic we often feel lost, like we are not part of the Dna strand anymore, drifting off leaving only a brief trail to find our way back.

To understand something you must look at it from a different point of view. I believe reality is the balance of life. Through all the chaos and control there will always be a balance. Making any sense?

My opinion on reality:
It is whatever you are experiencing.. it does not matter what rules govern it... reality is pretty much whatever you are experiencing, whenever and wherever you experience it, so yes, IMO dreams are reality when you are dreaming, they are just governed by different laws than waking life. (pretty much NONE of the normal laws of waking life lol ) Basically, to define reality, you have to first define what "being concious" really is, which is also really hard to define too sooo...

I don't know who said this, nor do I know the exact phrase, but nevertheless here it is :
Reality is comparable to a Rorschach Inkblot Test....

Isn't it ?

When our survival is instinctually the most important thing, what use is it to know whether physical reality is real or not? And then (if you believe it's not real) to base a whole philosophy on the belief that reality is not real (which cannot be proven)?

When you stop the philosophical analysis, you're left with the most real thing that there is to a human being.

As humans, I think we define reality by what we've seen that's real or what we've been told what's real. We percieve reality to what we have seen, heard, and wanted to be the truth.

Originally posted by bradybaker
There is no real or unreal, there is only the interaction of matter and energy. You, your family, your mind, your emotions are just the interactions of matter and energy.

that's depressing


I think that anything we feel, hear, precieve with our sences is real for a certain amount of time. Dreams can be REAL but only for a short amount of time. Waking life is real for a full lifetime, not just a single night.


Vox

Originally posted by dreamscape
As humans, I think we define reality by what we've seen that's real or what we've been told what's real. We percieve reality to what we have seen, heard, and wanted to be the truth.

So you're saying that our definitions of reality are all based on memory of past experience which may or may not be accurate.

I think that anything we feel, hear, precieve with our sences is real for a certain amount of time. Dreams can be REAL but only for a short amount of time. Waking life is real for a full lifetime, not just a single night. [/b]

I was pondering what allowed me to fly in my dreams and what prevented me from flying in real life. I then had the thought that the knowledge of something outside of this experience is the decisive factor. I then considered a friend who, while on Salvia got the idea that he was waking up from life and that everything else had just been a "dream". Just something to ponder.

Yes and no. I think reality is what we want it to be. I'm saying like people don't believe in purple fuzzy dragons (most of us) because they've never seen purple fuzzy dragons doesn't mean purple fuzzy dragons don't exist.

I think the words reality and truth are very "human" words and can only uneccessarily complicate discussions like this one. I basically agree with Bradybaker on how everything is made up of the basic building blocks of particles which MUST exist, and the words "reality" and "truth" don't apply to them, because they just ARE. If they didn't exist, we'd have nothing to think or perceive with and we wouldn't be here. I know that if you're reading this, you know for a fact that you can think and perceive and are self-aware, which means you have to be made of something. Again, if that certain "something" didn't exist, you wouldn't, but you do (if you're reading and comprehending this). If you think about it, everything is made of those particles: not only us, but our minds and the ideas and mental impulses that go through them. You can ask for all eternity: "well what if that isn't the case?", but what else could the case be? We exist, right? So, until you find the answer to that question (I doubt there even is one), you might as well just go by what you perceive, because that's all you have.

Also, Belisaurus, what is your definition of reality? You seem unsure that what we're perceiving is true reality, so what is reality exactly? What's the difference between it and existance?

I don't know what reality is, but at least I admit it. There are so many different metaphysical theories and any of them could be true, but it's impossible to know which one is true.

BTW, there are many theories about reality, here are just a few: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

The article is about epistemology, but there is a section about epistemological/metaphysical theories.