Perception...
- Thread starter derek
- Start date
Cythraul
Active Member
- Dec 10, 2003
- 6,755
- 134
- 63
Silver Incubus said:
Just because electrical impulses in the brain are causally necessary for experience does not mean that the latter can be collapsed into the former. Furthermore, it's just a fallacy to suppose that "we create reality solely in our minds" on the grounds that perception is mediated.
Silver Incubus
Dead Hands Justin
SO you are trying to tell me what? That our brian has no relation to how we see and experience the world? That we don't have filters on what we see, hear touch and taste? Filters that are formed through experience?
I have a hard time believing this simply because by your dissagreeing with me, you are actually proving how your life experiences and mental filtering, cause you to see a different version of reality. Based on what you believe to be truth.
I have a hard time believing this simply because by your dissagreeing with me, you are actually proving how your life experiences and mental filtering, cause you to see a different version of reality. Based on what you believe to be truth.
Silver Incubus
Dead Hands Justin
Your the one who said it was a Fallacy to suppose that we create reality in our minds, and now you say you didn't say that?
Clairify what you are talking about then, and be very straightforward as to what you are refering to. You said later into the former, which latter.
You are saying we don't experience, unless it's the brain?
Clairify what you are talking about then, and be very straightforward as to what you are refering to. You said later into the former, which latter.
You are saying we don't experience, unless it's the brain?
crimsonfloyd
Active Member
Silver Incubus
Dead Hands Justin
where in my argument does it become illogical?
everything we experience is interpreted by the brain/mind, this is not true?
if you changed the way a brian/mind experiences reality, does that not then change the reality one experiences? that is logical.
so in conclusion, the brain/mind creates reality bases on what it experiences. I don't see how that can not be logical.
everything we experience is interpreted by the brain/mind, this is not true?
if you changed the way a brian/mind experiences reality, does that not then change the reality one experiences? that is logical.
so in conclusion, the brain/mind creates reality bases on what it experiences. I don't see how that can not be logical.
Cythraul
Active Member
- Dec 10, 2003
- 6,755
- 134
- 63
Silver Incubus said:
I didn't merely say that it's a fallacy to suppose that "we create reality in our minds." It clearly wouldn't be a fallacy to draw that conclusion if you were warranted in making that inference from the premise that perception is mediated i.e. we do not directly perceive the external world. But nothing of the sort follows from that premise.
proglodite
Member
To the hypnotised, the apple is clearly more real than the potato. To the majority - the audience - the potato is clearly more real than the apple. The question is, can you conclude that the potato is more real, based merely on the fact that more people think that it is so?
crimsonfloyd
Active Member
You put your left hand in a bucket of ice. Afterwards you put both hands into 60 degree F. water. Your right hand is cold and your left hand is warm. Which one is really feeling the water. Obviously this is a silly question because we are speaking about two different relationships with the water. The same goes with original example, both relationships are real, but they are different relationships, therefore lead to different perceptions.
proglodite
Member
Silver Incubus
Dead Hands Justin
to what you preceive it to be.
I mean you can think of the reality of the serfs of the dark ages compared to now, and you can see a whole different perception of what reality is. If you were a scientist back then you may have been thought of to be a sorcerer and in league with the devil, now we think of them as investigators of "reality" but quantum physics is shedding some new light on what reality might be.
I mean you can think of the reality of the serfs of the dark ages compared to now, and you can see a whole different perception of what reality is. If you were a scientist back then you may have been thought of to be a sorcerer and in league with the devil, now we think of them as investigators of "reality" but quantum physics is shedding some new light on what reality might be.
crimsonfloyd
Active Member
A subject's perception of reality (liitle r) is relative to it's relationships. Reality (big R) is a collective of all relationships. Reality's collective nature negates all relativity.proglodite said:
Cythraul
Active Member
- Dec 10, 2003
- 6,755
- 134
- 63
Silver Incubus said:
This should be obvious but I'll make it clear for you. Here's your argument:
1.Everything we experience is interpreted by the brain/mind
2.If you change the way a brain/mind experiences reality, then the reality one experiences changes.
___________________
Therefore, the brain/mind creates reality.
First of all, you're trading on the notions of reality and subjective experience. Just because the stuff you experience in your head is mediated by the brain, and quite trivially, interpreted, it does not follow that you create what goes on outside of your head. Arguably, nobody is using the notion of reality in the sense that reality is whatever is directly present to your senses i.e. sense data. Presumably, what people mean by 'reality' is something not in your head, which relates causally to the experiences that you have. That is, the stuff out there causes what's going on in your head. That is not to say that what's going on in your head isn't interpreted or what have you. It's quite clear that the second premise of your argument is illicit. You are only assuming what you're trying to prove. The very thing in question is whether or not a change in the way you experience things actually changes "reality." It doesn't make much sense to say the reality one experiences changes, since presumably you mean by reality something that is not exclusively in the head. If that's not what you mean then I see no reason to add "the reality one experiences..." You could have just as easily said "If you change the way a brain/mind experiences reality, then the way a brain/mind experiences reality changes." But that's just trivial. The first premise of your argument certainly doesn't lend any help on the former interpretation, and it's just redundant on the latter interpretation. Given these considerations, it's pretty clear that the conclusion of your argument doesn't follow.
Silver Incubus
Dead Hands Justin
Ok, but the reality that is out there, is still only to precieved to be out there because of you senses telling you it is out there. Without those senses, you would have no proof of anything being out there. You can't explain to a blind person what the colour red is because they will never be able to comprehend what a colour is.
proglodite
Member
crimsonfloyd said:
But can you differentiate between the two? Who is to determine absolute reality?
Norsemaiden
barbarian
I would like to know how someone who says reality is created in one's own mind would define the word "delusional". And whether they think it is possible for someone to be "deluded".
What about the way that reality so often breaks through people's delusional interpretation of what reality is and causes a crisis for them?
The reason the ecology and the state of humankind generally is in such disarray is because people don't face reality. They won't first look at what is out there and use those observations to decide what to do and think, they prefer to insulate themselves from discomforting realisations by clinging to illusions.
What about the way that reality so often breaks through people's delusional interpretation of what reality is and causes a crisis for them?
The reason the ecology and the state of humankind generally is in such disarray is because people don't face reality. They won't first look at what is out there and use those observations to decide what to do and think, they prefer to insulate themselves from discomforting realisations by clinging to illusions.
