Thread: Reality As You Know It Does Not Exist

Now for some retro-quoting. Here, you'll see some substance

Just so you don't say I didn't offer anything substantial.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Human beings are too arrogant to think the universe exists because of them. Bah, we are only barely capable of conscious thought and already think our mind breaks the laws of physics. We think the mind is something immaterial, but it is only the outcome of neurochemical processes in our brains. The feeling of being experiencing something, or consciousness as humans named it, is only one of the functions of the brain. Consciousness requires intelligence, and intelligence is how complex and well-functional the brain anatomy is - given shape to and filtered by evolution.

So no, the mind does not exist. The brain exists, but it's as subject to the laws of physics as anything else. It is arrogant (and dumb) to think human beings are special. Just because we don't/can't observe something, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We once couldn't observe atoms, but voilà, they were always there.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

All that stuff in the video was already coined by Plato, much, much before our time. Search for his Cavern Myth (I think that's the name). The answer to it is the scientific principle of uncertainty - we can never be sure we are in the Matrix or in the real world. Maybe there are thousands of matrix one inside the other.. who knows. Maybe there isn't a real world at all, only the matrix. Nevertheless, and most importantly, it's one single question we will never have the answer to, no matter what we do - we'll never have a confirmation - not even after death (that'd be stupid). So, as dr House once brilliantly said: "I prefer to live life like this wasn't only a test."

You just have no idea just how extremely much human thoughts are clouded by instinct and emotion. To the point of fear of death making people come up with huge conspiracy theories, and so on. An expression I came up with, and like it very much, is: we are blinded by our own eyes.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

There is simply no point in creating a life philosophy based on electron behaviour - simply because absolutely nothing assures us we know everything there is to know about electrons. What to our eyes may seem random might have a very logical underlying explanation. Quantum theory is still fresh new, and scientists all over the world agree there is just too much to learn before it can be considered even accurate, but believers go all the way to an area they understand crap about to try to prove/create/debate belief.

The real reason is that there is no reason at all. The real sense is that there is no sense at all. The real knowledge is that there is no knowledge at all. Saying this will not make you understand, as I've said it didn't make anyone understand before. We use logic in mathematics, in diagnosis, in science, but only few people use logic to really understand.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Haha I explained exactly what quantum entanglement has to do with my view. Just because we do not understand it now, it doesn't mean it's something random or illogic. As Einstein himself explained, if something seems random, then there's probably an underlying reason we aren't observing. Just because science does not know why particles change properties seemingly randomly, it doesn't mean it doesn't have a reason. Saying it doesn't have a reason is idiotic. Just because we don't see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

My advice? Leave quantum physics to professionals who know what they're talking about. Don't try to place particle physics in the middle of a philosophic debate.


I never said that was the line of thought I adopted - "it makes sense already, let's stop going further". No no. Many times, you go as deep as the bottom, only to find that the answer didn't require such depth. Yet, since you're been to the bottom, you know for certain the answer is true. That's what I've talking about the whole time.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Lol it's not the same thing, and I'll explain why. With the god assumption, you have the belief in god but not a fact associated with its existence. With quantum entanglement, you have the fact but not something that would explain it. Actually, the logic is the opposite of the god paradigm.


Nah. The example you used doesn't fit. Firstly, because there is no "most logical" way to get out of the position. There is only a way that benefits the person the most. And what one considers benefits them the most is relative.

What I mean when I (and probably the rest of the world) say 'logic', is stuff like: All boys wear hats. Matt is a boy. Therefore, Matt uses a hat.

Logic is under no circumstance relative. It might be that the premises are false, such as not all boys wearing hats, or Matt not being a boy... but if the premises are true, then the logical deduction that Matt uses a hat is also true.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Nah, don't try to assume what I think. I said something and you interpreted it wrongly. My point is that all we do and will to do is only human emotion/instinct, and that if we were reason alone, we wouldn't even question things, because there would be no will to question. Will is human condition. And that is what I consider my knowledge, and just saying this will never get you to understand what it fully means. You have to experience having no will at all in order to understand. I never said that the physical is absolute. I just said that it's ridiculous to try to find a meaning for life based on what we don't yet understand of quantum physics.


Particle physics won't give you insight your you reason for existing. That's what I'm trying to say when I say not to use quantum theory in philosophical arguments. I didn't "ignore the validity of many of the things expressed in the video". I don't deny some stuff in the video was right (a video can't be so bad as to be 100% wrong), but there are too many flaws on it to take it seriously.


Science works on that same logic. And the logic I'm using is as valid as any other, but I insist, only describing it will not make you agree with me. You need to feel what it is like to have no will, just once, for you to agree with me. We are only humans, only the product of the medium. There's nothing special to it.


You didn't say a thing in there. I said that if the premise is true, the conclusion is true, because of logic. I was actually explaining to you what logic is, since you seem not to understand it.


I've already said my point, you are the one to ignore it. Don't use quantum physics, especially an area that is so poorly known, to try to prove something in a philosophical argument - and that goes for you and the people on the video.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Lol there's no scientifically explaining human opinion, shall you? I think it is bullshit, because it does not make any credible sense. The reason, as I stated repeatedly, is that you shouldn't take quantum theory and place it in the middle of a philosophical discussion. Any conclusions arising from that have no scientific/logical validity whatsoever.

True nature of the universe? If you can't understand it at your current age, give up trying. I've already stated a lot like the Cavern Myth and the principle of uncertainty, to human perception. Understand whatever you want from it. But don't complain when I state I'm smarter than you.


Again, never said anything about "treat each other as one". You get me so wrong it's no even funny. I'm starting to believe you are incapable of it. I am not going to extensively refute everything they say on the video, first because I don't have the patience, second because I'm no expert, and third because I do know they know shit of what they are talking about. Much of what they say is just their own ideas, thrown in the middle of complicated scientific speech to make it sound scientific too.


That said, I have given billion reasons to why that video is ridiculous. Go read the Cavern Myth, and you'll understand that you can imagine any explanation to the universe if you just decide to imagine. There's nothing scientific in the views held through the video. There, another reason for you. I've mentally counted at least 7 now.


No you didn't. If you did, try it again. That was style without substance. I explained you what logic is because you don't seems to know. Your idea of logic is ambiguous, mixed with others things, like human concepts of "good", "right", "sense", "simplicity". Logic is logic - and logic is one thing that's impartial and irrefutable. Premises are refutable, not logic.


No, that is not true, and you know it. Don't put words in my mouth goddamnit. That is just not logic, it's deduction. Deduction uses logic, but isn't irrefutable as logic - deduction can very easily be wrong.

Logic would be something like the following line of thought: two people come out of a closet. One of them is injured. So, did the other person hurt them? The logical answer would be "not necessarily"


It's the first one. And just go read the Cavern Myth NAO. It's quick and clean. You'll see that the video's so-bright theory was imagined in antiquity. The law of uncertainty was made on that exact principle - and this is physics 101. The answer is we'll never be able to prove if there is an "other, material world", instead of just echoes, or shadows, or whatever you want to think of it. But if you say this proves your point, then I'm sorry but that's an irrefutable argument.


Just so you don't have to ask again, my point is: don't try to use concepts from an unknown area of quantum physics to try to prove any point in a philosophical debate.

Also, O:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_cave

In my opinion, I believe that because we are physical beings, we cannot perceive the true nature of physical objects in a perfect, non-diluted way. It would be akin to trying to find what lies beyond the veil of death without actually dying. We can continuously divide the physical objects of the universe in a hypothetical sense, but our physical senses and capabilities divide what we can achieve in terms of information as well. Therefore, the smaller the thing we are trying to percieve, the less it seems to exist to our perception. In the reverse, it is almost impossibly difficult for us to fully understand the nature of everything, because we are multiplying what we are perceiving infinitely, making it impossible for us to view things at a larger scale without leaving bits of data out.

Unless you can perceive infinity and perfect zero simultaneously, then you cannot understand the absolute nature of reality. You are merely dividing the line between 0 and 1, dancing between a decimal followed by infinite 9's and a decimal followed by infinite zeros with a 1 at the end. You are merely shifting back and forth between materialism (1) and nihilism (0). You should not embrace one or the other. You should embrace the whole. Or at least try to. n__n