Reality is That

[James R]

wellwisher:

Possible objections:

If a tree falls in the woods and there is nobody there to hear it fall, does it still make a sound?

The answer is yes, because sound is defined as vibration and waves, which will still form in the local air, regardless, since the physical systems are sufficient to create the effect. As long as there is air and motion there will be a vibration and the transmission of sound; make a noise. Reality exists based on natural principles, even if we are not conscious of it.

1. "Sound" may refer to perception rather than to mere vibrations or waves in a medium.
2. If you're not present, how do you even know the vibrations happen?
3. How do you know reality is based on "natural principles"? Isn't that an assumption?
4. What if consciousness is required for reality?

If you answer the above question, no, since there is no observer to hear, you would assume reality needs the filters of the human mind to exist, and reality would not continue to exist apart from the human mind.

How do you know that is not the case?

Reality is that which exists apart from the observer.

How do you know that things exist apart from the observer?

 

[Write4U]

How do you know that things exist apart from the observer?

We can verify physical reality through consensus by second and third observers, even as each only observes (experiences) a small portion of physical reality and even then it is relative to the position of those observers.. The accumulated information confirms the existence of objects even in the absence of an observer. This is the function of science, no?

There is no reason to assume that things could not exist without an observer. The universe is a process, totally independent of any observation.
The Universe did not exist until humans came along to observe it?? To assume that humans have anything to do with the entirety of universal reality is spiritual hubris, IMO.

 

[James R]

Write4U:

Sorry to be obtuse, but this is the Philosophy forum, after all.

We can verify physical reality through consensus by second and third observers, even as each only observes (experiences) a small portion of physical reality and even then it is relative to the position of those observers.. The accumulated information confirms the existence of objects even in the absence of an observer. This is the function of science, no?

How do you know that these second and third observer people you refer to aren't just figments of your imagination? It comes back to the question of how you know that things exist apart from yourself - your own mind. I don't think there's any way you can be sure about that, even if it makes a lot of sense to act as if it were true.

There is no reason to assume that things could not exist without an observer. The universe is a process, totally independent of any observation.
The Universe did not exist until humans came along to observe it?? To assume that humans have anything to do with the entirety of universal reality is spiritual hubris, IMO.

Forget humans in general. It could be that the universe didn't exist until you, personally came along to observe/imagine it.

 

[Write4U]

Write4U:

Sorry to be obtuse, but this is the Philosophy forum, after all.

I understand and I realize that Philosophy allows for such speculation.

How do you know that these second and third observer people you refer to aren't just figments of your imagination? It comes back to the question of how you know that things exist apart from yourself - your own mind. I don't think there's any way you can be sure about that, even if it makes a lot of sense to act as if it were true.

No one has the capacity to create the works by people such as Einstein, except Einstein. Clear proof that other people do exist independent of my thoughts. Few have reached that kind of depth of philosophy, stemming from their RW observations.

Forget humans in general. It could be that the universe didn't exist until you, personally came along to observe/imagine it.

I would not exist unless the universe exists. We all have a history of birth. I will stipulate that none of us see (or experience) the universe exactly like another, because that would be physically impossible.

 

[Brainiac]

Reality, from its very beginning, would be the exact same all the way to its end.

 

[Write4U]

Reality, from its very beginning, would be the exact same all the way to its end

???

Reality is a result of the Implicate becoming Explicate. As this process is a dynamic process reality is not exactly the same from instant to instant (QM).

 

[Brainiac]

???

Reality is a result of the Implicate becoming Explicate. As this process is a dynamic process reality is not exactly the same from instant to instant (QM).

I am saying that reality is self-consistent. If it weren't then any absurd thing could occur.

 

[Write4U]

I am saying that reality is self-consistent. If it weren't then any absurd thing could occur.

Every absurd thing possible is part of reality. As long as an action or condition is not in conflict with universal constant and natural laws, you can expect to see it become reality, eventually.

I believe you are arguing for Determinism.

The problem I have is with placing "consciousness" within the scheme of reality. Is the observer inside or outside of reality or can he be both?

 

[Brainiac]

There is a limit to how accurately we can perceive reality, that is the point of convergence between reality and perception.

 

[Write4U]

There is a limit to how accurately we can perceive reality, that is the point of convergence between reality and perception.

This is why science demands proofs and any proposed condition or function in reality is agreed upon by consensus of observed and tested phenomena.

 

[Fork]

Reality is that which when you see it, you'll recognize it and so would everyone else. Even though we are yet to seize its true or ultimate nature.

 

[Write4U]

Reality is that which when you see it, you'll recognize it and so would everyone else. Even though we are yet to seize its true or ultimate nature.

I disagree. It is not that we cannot have a common experience, but we may not recognize it or even be able to interpret it all the same way. Moreover we experience but a tiny portion of reality. Our sensory abilities are very poor compared to other species, even then we may be completely fooled by what we experience when seeing something.. We are able to make gadgets to help us "see" reality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF61lhEeGng

Let me give you a small example,

Two musicians stand alongside a train track, a mile apart. Between them a train is travelling at high speed while blowing it's new whistle.
The next day the musicians meet and talk about the new train whistle.
Musician one claims he heard the train whistle clearly and it's true pitch was a C, which he had confirmed with his pitch pipe.
Musician two claims he also heard the train whistle but its true pitch was indisputably a D , which had confirmed with his pitch pipe.

Who is lying and who is correct? Answer: Both are speaking truth and both are wrong.

Musician three who had travelled on the train joins the conversation and declares that the actual true pitch of the train whistle was Csharp/Dflat, which he confirmed with his pitch pipe, standing on the train next to the whistle.

The only point of agreement was that they were listening to a train whistle.

Thus in this example we show that three musicians can have three different real time experiences of listening to a single note of a train whistle.
They all heard correctly, but musician three was the only one able to hear the true inherent pitch of the whistle (at rest). The other musicians heard the pitch relative to their point of observation (Doppler effect).

But it gets much weirder with our actual poor ability to process information with any sort of certainty. Optical illusions are the most convincing proof that our brains allow us to see very little of reality and any declaration of certainty is highly dubious. That is why we have science and the scientific method. Gross personal experiences, even if experienced by a number of people at the same time, may be totally incorrect and misleading even.

Animated illusions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwp&NR=1&v=-KP-KJdMp3U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdW7PvGZ0uM&feature=g-logo-xit

Color illusion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlvAPYvETY8&feature=channel&list=UL

Funny: deleted for content

Profound
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=sKqt6e7EcCs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7d13SgqUXg&feature=related

Lifeperspective
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58fs5yI8K9I&feature=related

 

[sanam5511]

Reality is the state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or might be imagined. In a wider definition, reality includes everything that is and has been, whether or not it is observable or comprehensible.

 

[absols]

reality first is about being real urself

being real is what connect u with objective reality

being real is about realizing urself present sense objectively, according to relations with all else positively, else is mostly the abstraction of any to things

reality cant b of creations

creations ends are always about wills and subjective positive incomes

to see anything as being present really the conscious must b real too

so it must b truly existing

then u can understand how being is according to what is there objectively and how everything end like one reality

u r so happy to claim being with evil jesus bc of some powers he got, while u insist to talk about reality as if u could possess any sense of it, which show the evil end u r all

the more i or others true persons talk about reality the more reality is shown much more complexity

reality is principally about relating freedom and present ends, which is impossible since freedom by definition is not objective and present end so objective by definition cant b nothing to objective so cant b free, which is how reality is also infinite

so u cant know anything now or after about reality

the only point is evil, what u strive to justify not being ur end as if u mean to b real

while if u werent evil u wont mean that

evil has nothing to do with being real, evil is smthg else that must b destroyed for values only and standard of existence that cant allow it

 

[Fork]

We know a few things about reality, such as it is not imaginary, and that whatever it is, it is real.

 

[Fork]

Reality is definitely not nothing, which is a distinct realm of its own.