Objective reality: How do we know it exists ?
- Thread starter Enmos
- Start date
but Glaucon as you no doubt agree this is based on insuffficient knowledge of how the mind works.
Dreams from my experience are indeed generated by external stimulus, then interpreted by the imagination, added with subconscious requirements and thrown up on your internal visonary capacity in the form of a florid halucination type experience.
So IMO dreams certainly do have external stimulous similar to all thought I guess.
However the arguement as to whether or not they come close to being "objective" is highly debatable IMO [ given current understanding of mental isolation of individuals.
The local indigenous peoples here in Australia have been talking about "shared dreaming for ages" which is suggestive of some form of objective nature to dreaming.
So, I take it no one has anything better than,"of course objective reality exists, it's there when I return to it later"?
Or am I mistaken?
Or am I mistaken?
You are correct; I do indeed agree with you on this.
I agree with this as well, with one (extremely important) caveat: the external stimulus in question is not active at the time of dreaming; it is in fact a post-experience stimulus.
Of one sort of another originally, yes. But similarly, one's recollection of say, eating ice-cream, is intrinsically different from that very experience. So, to my way of thinking, a dream-'experience', is no experience at all.
Agreed. And so, regardless of how we choose to classify a dream-experience, we cannot reasonably maintain that this can support an objective ontology. That is, unless you choose to go the Rationalist way.. a la Descartes..
agreed with the emphasis on the word "reasonably". Even if you choose to go the Descartes way.....haYou are correct; I do indeed agree with you on this.
I agree with this as well, with one (extremely important) caveat: the external stimulus in question is not active at the time of dreaming; it is in fact a post-experience stimulus.
Of one sort of another originally, yes. But similarly, one's recollection of say, eating ice-cream, is intrinsically different from that very experience. So, to my way of thinking, a dream-'experience', is no experience at all.
Agreed. And so, regardless of how we choose to classify a dream-experience, we cannot reasonably maintain that this can support an objective ontology. That is, unless you choose to go the Rationalist way.. a la Descartes..
I remembered after posting that for example you may be familiar with how people used to play a trick on a sleeping individual by putting warm water on their wrist while they were sleeping generating interesting outcomes both physically and in dreaming.
[chuckle]
No it's not. You have no proof. You cannot just say somebody's argument is contradictory without anything to back up such hyperpathetical claims.
It is contradictory in the classical logical sense.
Look it up.
You're using logic to support the notion that objective reality exists (not that you've actually laid out this argument yet..) and tehn you mention that logic itself must be assumed. In doing this, you call into question the reliability of the very methodology which you are using to make your point. This is de facto question-begging, as well as circular.
luke, I've said this time and time again on here, you have a complete lack of comprehension with respect to logic. You think you have an understanding (most likely because you've read some Wiki articles..) but you consistently display a comprehension level of a 2nd year high school student.
Go out, buy an Intro. to Logic book.
Read it all.
Logic is assumed. There is no such thing as anybody using anything to support the notion of objective reality outside of anything. I am assuming the parameters of logic. Thus, anything outside of the parameters being discussed has no relevance to my statement. Does objective reality exist? Assuming logic, and operating specifically within the parameters of logic, it does. Logic is a faith based method of reasoning.
Perhaps I'm not using good terminology with 'assume' and 'presume'. The point I'm trying to make is the importance of being aware that logic is completely faith based. The problem is that some go about conversations without acknowledging the parameters they are working in. Then go back and forth with each other discussing apples and oranges operating with completely different methods of reasoning as is apparent in your last post.
There's nothing stopping anybody form saying they are right that objective reality exists because 2 + 2 = 3. Or curly fries with cheese are yummy. Therefore, objective logic exists.
Then there is the misinterpretation of belief. Everything one sees, hears, senses, knows to be true or falls. All of it is that person's belief. Everything no matter what is a belief.
Perhaps I'm not using good terminology with 'assume' and 'presume'. The point I'm trying to make is the importance of being aware that logic is completely faith based. The problem is that some go about conversations without acknowledging the parameters they are working in. Then go back and forth with each other discussing apples and oranges operating with completely different methods of reasoning as is apparent in your last post.
There's nothing stopping anybody form saying they are right that objective reality exists because 2 + 2 = 3. Or curly fries with cheese are yummy. Therefore, objective logic exists.
Then there is the misinterpretation of belief. Everything one sees, hears, senses, knows to be true or falls. All of it is that person's belief. Everything no matter what is a belief.
Last edited:
Don't waste your acid posting.
Um. Ok. Let me offer an argument similar to lukes, I'll try to be a bit more cogent.
It cannot be said that we have access to an objective means of perceiving reality. Our perception is inherently subjective, thus any information on anything is subjective in nature. Thus we never experience an objective reality, only our subjective perception of this alleged reality. While this does not mean that there is definitely no objective reality, it does mean that any appeal to an objective reality cannot be said to be objectively based, and thus "proven".
Or would you like to pursue the idea that our perceptions can be shown to give us true and accurate information on anything outside of our own mind? I would be very interested in such a concept, and method, if possible.
It cannot be said that we have access to an objective means of perceiving reality. Our perception is inherently subjective, thus any information on anything is subjective in nature. Thus we never experience an objective reality, only our subjective perception of this alleged reality. While this does not mean that there is definitely no objective reality, it does mean that any appeal to an objective reality cannot be said to be objectively based, and thus "proven".
Or would you like to pursue the idea that our perceptions can be shown to give us true and accurate information on anything outside of our own mind? I would be very interested in such a concept, and method, if possible.
Wrong. There is no necessary method of perceiving true information. The senses perceive information period. If we perceive something that isn't there, then our perceptions are incorrect. If we perceive something that is there, then our perceptions are correct. In either case, we are perceiving something to be there.
Language interferes with thought, and makes relative concepts appear to be absolute. Such as the quality of being objective. You can only strive to be as objective as possible in your judgements.
Unless you perceive what is there as something it's not.
Your ability to reason must be a bit limited. I take it that you consider your own perceptions to be objective? How can you know that what you perceive is what I perceive, much less that we both perceive something which "truly" exists objectively.
Language seems to interfere with your thought, I agree. Perhaps you should attend to dictionary.com or something so as to reduce your apparent ignorance.
:bugeye:I just went over this. Language distortion of relative qualities as absolutes.
Yes. Wow. Did you figure all that out by yourself?
Ok. Perhaps a helpful definition. Objective reality would be reality which exists the same for all. It is not dependent on anything, it simply is. Subjective reality would be what you experience through your senses. You cannot say that you experience anything the way I experience anything because our experiences are, by nature, different, for they are each our own.
Your turn. Lanuage distortion of relative qualities as absolutes? I know what the words mean, but not what you mean specifically. Absolutes=? What do you define as relative qualities?
There's a book titled "Eyewitness Companionshilosophy" by Stephen Law. It holds alot of definitions and words in common usage in discussing philosophy. It's an easy read, too. I recommend it.
Your turn. Lanuage distortion of relative qualities as absolutes? I know what the words mean, but not what you mean specifically. Absolutes=? What do you define as relative qualities?
There's a book titled "Eyewitness Companions
hilosophy" by Stephen Law. It holds alot of definitions and words in common usage in discussing philosophy. It's an easy read, too. I recommend it.Absolutes as in claiming that a person is objective, smart, responsible, organized, etc. You cannot necessarily claim yourself or anybody to be anything. But you can strive towards doing so.
Object and subject are simply the what is being perceived and what is doing the perceiving. The subject does not create the object. In order for the subject to perceive an object, that object must exist.
Object and subject are simply the what is being perceived and what is doing the perceiving. The subject does not create the object. In order for the subject to perceive an object, that object must exist.
Oh. So you are unfamiliar with any other word usage besides your own and unwilling to accept that the context the words are in suggests something not in accordance with what you are thinking.
I'm not sure whether to be awestruck by your audacity or saddened by your imbecility.
I'll go to dictionary.com for you. I don't want you to strain yourself.
I'm not sure whether to be awestruck by your audacity or saddened by your imbecility.
I'll go to dictionary.com for you. I don't want you to strain yourself.
ob⋅jec⋅tive /əbˈdʒɛktɪv/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [uhb-jek-tiv] Show IPA
–noun 1. something that one's efforts or actions are intended to attain or accomplish; purpose; goal; target: the objective of a military attack; the objective of a fund-raising drive.
2. Grammar. a. Also called objective case. (in English and some other languages) a case specialized for the use of a form as the object of a transitive verb or of a preposition, as him in The boy hit him, or me in He comes to me with his troubles.
b. a word in that case.
3. Also called object glass, object lens, objective lens. Optics. (in a telescope, microscope, camera, or other optical system) the lens or combination of lenses that first receives the rays from the object and forms the image in the focal plane of the eyepiece, as in a microscope, or on a plate or screen, as in a camera.
–adjective 4. being the object or goal of one's efforts or actions.
5. not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.
6. intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.
7. being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
8. of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to something that is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of thought or an observer as part of reality.
9. Grammar. a. pertaining to the use of a form as the object of a transitive verb or of a preposition.
b. (in English and some other languages) noting the objective case.
c. similar to such a case in meaning.
d. (in case grammar) pertaining to the semantic role of a noun phrase that denotes something undergoing a change of state or bearing a neutral relation to the verb, as the rock in The rock moved or in The child threw the rock.
10. being part of or pertaining to an object to be drawn: an objective plane.
11. Medicine/Medical. (of a symptom) discernible to others as well as the patient.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Origin:
1610–20; < ML objectīvus, equiv. to L object(us) (see object ) + -īvus -ive
Related forms:
ob⋅jec⋅tive⋅ly, adverb
ob⋅jec⋅tive⋅ness, noun
Synonyms:
1. object, destination, aim. 5. impartial, fair, impersonal, disinterested.
Antonyms:
5. personal.
per dictionary.com
Do you need subjective's definition too? Need this one explained?
–noun 1. something that one's efforts or actions are intended to attain or accomplish; purpose; goal; target: the objective of a military attack; the objective of a fund-raising drive.
2. Grammar. a. Also called objective case. (in English and some other languages) a case specialized for the use of a form as the object of a transitive verb or of a preposition, as him in The boy hit him, or me in He comes to me with his troubles.
b. a word in that case.
3. Also called object glass, object lens, objective lens. Optics. (in a telescope, microscope, camera, or other optical system) the lens or combination of lenses that first receives the rays from the object and forms the image in the focal plane of the eyepiece, as in a microscope, or on a plate or screen, as in a camera.
–adjective 4. being the object or goal of one's efforts or actions.
5. not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.
6. intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.
7. being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
8. of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to something that is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of thought or an observer as part of reality.
9. Grammar. a. pertaining to the use of a form as the object of a transitive verb or of a preposition.
b. (in English and some other languages) noting the objective case.
c. similar to such a case in meaning.
d. (in case grammar) pertaining to the semantic role of a noun phrase that denotes something undergoing a change of state or bearing a neutral relation to the verb, as the rock in The rock moved or in The child threw the rock.
10. being part of or pertaining to an object to be drawn: an objective plane.
11. Medicine/Medical. (of a symptom) discernible to others as well as the patient.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Origin:
1610–20; < ML objectīvus, equiv. to L object(us) (see object ) + -īvus -ive
Related forms:
ob⋅jec⋅tive⋅ly, adverb
ob⋅jec⋅tive⋅ness, noun
Synonyms:
1. object, destination, aim. 5. impartial, fair, impersonal, disinterested.
Antonyms:
5. personal.
per dictionary.com
Do you need subjective's definition too? Need this one explained?