Perception...

[crimsonfloyd]

But can you differentiate between the two? Who is to determine absolute reality?

Because there are other self-regulating subjects in the world it must be the case that either I am the only conscious being or there are others have experiences that I cannot directly experience. For the moment lets assume that the former is false and the later is true. I am henceforth obliged to recognize that Reality is more then what I experience. No single self-regulating subject can claim complete knowledge of Reality, it is unattainable. The only possible way for such a subject to exist would be through a one-many dichotomy, in which the experience of the many gathers under one. This concept of one is in fact the concept of Reality with the added attribute of consciousness. If such a one-many dichotomy is not the case, Reality can never be experienced and hence no self-regulating subject can determine reality. I am not saying whether such a one-many relationship exists or not, I'm not sure we can know.

Now concerning whether the other beings of the world are conscious. Such a recogition requires a fundumental openess to the other. This can be argued for in many ways. Heidegger for example, refers to such an openess through the concept known as "hearkening". Hearkening is defined as a primary form of hearing "which understands". Such a hearkening is founded upon keeping silent. As Heideger explains "Keeping silent authentically is possible only in genuine discoursing. To be able to keep silent (one) must have something to say- that is, it must have at its disposal an authentic and rich disclosedness of itself."

I know I'm getting long-winded, but you asked a loaded question where each answer creates more questions. So I guess I'll cut it off here for now...

 

[proglodite]

But supposing reality is subject to the individual?
I take it that you assume there is the 'real world' that everyone observes differently and takes that to be their 'reality'?

 

[crimsonfloyd]

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at with "is subject to the induvidual". If you mean under the control of the induvidual then I would say to a degree, but it is a reciprical relationship in which the subject is even also under the control of reality. However "control" really isn't the right word, perhaps "impacted".

Not "their reality" but "thier perception of reality".

 

[proglodite]

As in, 'Reality is to each individual what that individual perceives it to be.' So the hypnotised's apple is as real as the audience's potato, regardless of how many people hold a certain perspective on things. I don't know whether that makes me an extreme subjectivian, as Ashen put it in the other thread.

 

[jervi]

Thoughts like "Reality is plural" are more open-minded than they are extreme, I would say. And I agree with them.
But if someone points at me and says "Hah, you don't really exist. You're just a product of my imagination", then I would get slightly pissed..

 

[derek]

Thoughts like "Reality is plural" are more open-minded than they are extreme, I would say. And I agree with them.
But if someone points at me and says "Hah, you don't really exist. You're just a product of my imagination", then I would get slightly pissed..

Reply with: This is my dream so just shut the fuck up.

 

[Akirahito]

All reality is subjective. No two people's realities are going to be identical. Philosophy serves to delve into the greater mysteries of life, but it's true purpose is to push the limits of human thought. It strives to expand one's thinking beyond their safe, comfortable rationality of perception via senses. Philosophy is meant to force one to think in broader terms and view oneself as, basically, a nothing in comparison with the large 'something' that is the rest of what is known (and unknown). Being able to think without borders results in a stronger mind.

 

[Dushan S]

Ouch. There seems to be a semantics problem causing misunderstanding. What reality we are talking about?

1. Reality as a temporary social concept based on culture, public opinion, temporary scientific facts, perception of moral values etc.
2. Reality as a perception of a person, always highly individual and there is one for every living being. It is dependent on its own character traits, and in a lot of ways is a category one but modified in different way
3. Reality as a spiritual experience based on clearing inner self from content based on category 1 and 2, and then eventually having direct experience of it, that is not based on previous absorbed knowledge, and that is not based on informations we get from our senses..

This stuff with hypnosis few posts earlier is orange and apples, really. Both individual and collective realities are temporary, neither of them is unchengable, neither of them is more "right one". They are simply functional on different level, and absolutely needed for us to function as human beings.

 

[proglodite]

Ouch. There seems to be a semantics problem causing misunderstanding. What reality we are talking about?

1. Reality as a temporary social concept based on culture, public opinion, temporary scientific facts, perception of moral values etc.
2. Reality as a perception of a person, always highly individual and there is one for every living being. It is dependent on its own character traits, and in a lot of ways is a category one but modified in different way
3. Reality as a spiritual experience based on clearing inner self from content based on category 1 and 2, and then eventually having direct experience of it, that is not based on previous absorbed knowledge, and that is not based on informations we get from our senses..

None of the above. I've been talking so far about the physical world, a la Newton and the apple that fell on his head

This stuff with hypnosis few posts earlier is orange and apples, really. Both individual and collective realities are temporary, neither of them is unchengable, neither of them is more "right one". They are simply functional on different level, and absolutely needed for us to function as human beings.

Then what reality is permanent?

 

[Norsemaiden]

Someone is hypnotised into eating a large amount of a toxic, disgusting substance, believing it to be cake and then they get very ill indeed. In this case can we say that the reality of it being cake is the equivalent of it being the toxic stuff? If not, then the same goes for the trick of an onion being passed off as an apple.

 

[Dushan S]

None of the above. I've been talking so far about the physical world, a la Newton and the apple that fell on his head

It seems that you were not reading my post for real... There is not such a thing as physical world. When scientists talks about physical world it is mostly a first category (definiton based on temporary scientific concept and social concept). When non scientist talks about physical world it is mostly a second category, person speaks out of his own experiences and concept. When you think and when I think "physical world" different things come to our minds. Think about house for instance. You have some kind a picture, right? Think about yellow house? Keep that picture. So now compare it to me, I have thinkd about old austro-hungarian style building I have seen recently. So fact is that very probably your house does not have nothing in common with my house. If you talk about scientific concept, it will be probably be updated and replaced in some time as our "category one" knowledge grows. Your comment shows that it is hard for you to deatch from your own perception and be aware that this is not something "real". It is just your reality, and idea that there is a physical world is tailored in a very subjective and unique way, different than mine or Albert Einsteins idea of physical reality.

Someone is hypnotised into eating a large amount of a toxic, disgusting substance, believing it to be cake and then they get very ill indeed. In this case can we say that the reality of it being cake is the equivalent of it being the toxic stuff? If not, then the same goes for the trick of an onion being passed off as an apple.

It is a reality of the body, not personality. But also you can hypnotise person, tell her that you will touch her with burning stick and then touch her with a finger, and there will be a trace on her skin, like there was really a fire, you do know that? Also there are cases of yogies being able to take poison and let it go thru their body and out without getting killed, or for instance being able to stop physical function for a long time without causing death of body. Documented.
So it may be also a matter of perception, but so deep rooted that it becomes a reality in a physical sense and that body adopts to it thru time.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

Ouch. There seems to be a semantics problem causing misunderstanding. What reality we are talking about?

1. Reality as a temporary social concept based on culture, public opinion, temporary scientific facts, perception of moral values etc.
2. Reality as a perception of a person, always highly individual and there is one for every living being. It is dependent on its own character traits, and in a lot of ways is a category one but modified in different way
3. Reality as a spiritual experience based on clearing inner self from content based on category 1 and 2, and then eventually having direct experience of it, that is not based on previous absorbed knowledge, and that is not based on informations we get from our senses..

Yeah I was trying to make the distinction between your second and a variation of your third defintion with the reality/Reality dichotomy.

This stuff with hypnosis few posts earlier is orange and apples, really. Both individual and collective realities are temporary, neither of them is unchengable, neither of them is more "right one". They are simply functional on different level, and absolutely needed for us to function as human beings.

I agree with you here. However I would like to point out that the induvidual's reality is a subset of the collective Reality.

 

[Dushan S]

I agree with you here. However I would like to point out that the induvidual's reality is a subset of the collective Reality.

Well, if you think that collective reality affects subjective reality, you are absolutely right. But may I add that collective reality is also a sum of all subjective realities, and kind of greatest common denominator. Also we have seen thru history that single person can be that much powerful with his own subjective reality that then it affects collective reality in a lot of ways, be it for good or bad, Christ, Hitler, Tesla or Einstein.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

Well, if you think that collective reality affects subjective reality, you are absolutely right. But may I add that collective reality is also a sum of all subjective realities, and kind of greatest common denominator.

Yup, I agree completely.

There is not such a thing as physical world. When scientists talks about physical world it is mostly a first category (definiton based on temporary scientific concept and social concept). When non scientist talks about physical world it is mostly a second category, person speaks out of his own experiences and concept. When you think and when I think "physical world" different things come to our minds. Think about house for instance. You have some kind a picture, right? Think about yellow house? Keep that picture. So now compare it to me, I have thinkd about old austro-hungarian style building I have seen recently. So fact is that very probably your house does not have nothing in common with my house. If you talk about scientific concept, it will be probably be updated and replaced in some time as our "category one" knowledge grows. Your comment shows that it is hard for you to deatch from your own perception and be aware that this is not something "real". It is just your reality, and idea that there is a physical world is tailored in a very subjective and unique way, different than mine or Albert Einsteins idea of physical reality.

There seems to be some tension, almost a contradiction between this statement and the former statement. If subjective realities combine to create collective reality, and the collective reality is "real", then why are the subjective realities not "real" as well? Is the "realness" of colective reality lost when it is dissected into its various subjective realities? Why so? If not, then why wouldn't subjective reality be real?

Furthermore I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say there is no such thing as a "physical world". If you are suggesting that physics is merely a system of structures used to explain the "stuff" in the world, rather then true facts concerning the "stuff" in the world then I would be in agrement with the statement that there is no physical world. If, however you mean physical in the sense of actual or real, then I am somewhat confused on why this would be.

 

[Silver Incubus]

There seems to be some tension, almost a contradiction between this statement and the former statement. If subjective realities combine to create collective reality, and the collective reality is "real", then why are the subjective realities not "real" as well? Is the "realness" of colective reality lost when it is dissected into its various subjective realities? Why so? If not, then why wouldn't subjective reality be real?

The subjective reality is real to the subject only and no one else. And even still that reality is only an illusion based on the sensory input.

 

[Dushan S]

Yup, I agree completely.

There seems to be some tension, almost a contradiction between this statement and the former statement. If subjective realities combine to create collective reality, and the collective reality is "real", then why are the subjective realities not "real" as well? Is the "realness" of colective reality lost when it is dissected into its various subjective realities? Why so? If not, then why wouldn't subjective reality be real?

I didn't say that personal reality is less real than collective one. Actually, it is not that easy to differentiate between them, because they seem to flow one into other. Collective reality is something that spirit of the society has chosen as best solution for one period. People are "Normal" and are acting "Acceptable", "good", "productive" when they pretend their personal reality is very close or similar to collective reality. People having different realities that are open about it can be revolutionaries, artists, or people in mental institutions, etc. They can have a lot effect on society in a lot of cases. Also there are people that have their concpets of reality but pretend in a such a way to get more power, and then in turn they can later change reality of society when they get into positions... Leaders, politicians. So there is a constant flow between personal and collective concepts. Any of the realities 1 and 2 not seems real, because of their nature, they are based on individual perceptions of same things, and they lead into lies and acting.

Furthermore I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say there is no such thing as a "physical world". If you are suggesting that physics is merely a system of structures used to explain the "stuff" in the world, rather then true facts concerning the "stuff" in the world then I would be in agrement with the statement that there is no physical world. If, however you mean physical in the sense of actual or real, then I am somewhat confused on why this would be.

Now, what any person knows about world? He was told some stuff, he believes some stuff because it seems logical by his own opinion, because eventualy he is knowledgable in some field but directly, there is a difference between tasting something and being learned to know that some kind of food tastes in certain way. As all this is so personal and unobjective, human mind has in time adopted scientific approach that theoreticaly should be a method that will prove that something is objective truth. So now we know something because science says so. But then again we are still building our picture of the world based on belief. Even if you are scientist, there was a Newton, and now it appears it was not really the complete truth, and there was Einstein after that and nova days it appears tha he was partly wrong to etc. So we now have again science that instead of givin objective truth again gives temporary concept based on fact we know, and builds theories about stuff we are yet not able to know. So if everything we know about world around us is just an information feed thru our senses, And that information can be twisted on so many levels before you get to it, what is Real?
So finaly, we get to the sad truth that reality is for us something that most of other people we meet take as real. So we feel safe and confident if we share opinions and views of other people. But what if someone sees little green man coming out of UFO or anything unusual? He will be in fear that he will be rejected by society.Only he has seen little green man, is this real? Most of people would be in conflict of beleiving to his own senses or rather beleiving to standards other people gave them.
I am not sure if all this is good explanations. We CAN ASSUME that there is a physical world we all share, because it is so common thing. I think one of the good things about Matrix movie is questioning of this common reality. What if only you see truth, and every other human being is just sleeping? It is not so rare dilema, outside movie script. Every person was at one point close to doubting if all people around are wrong and only he - she can see things better. At that moment if he was right he changed reality of all other people. If he was wrong, he is looked upon as wacko.
So this is why I am questioning any kind of physical reality. Yes there is a reality, I know that, and I wont run over the street because car could kill me, but on the other hand, if everyone sees his own reality, than there is no reality at all. It is kind of Zen situation, both of this is truth 100% but in different way.

Also there is one more thing, perception of reality without pre learned knowledge, approaching it with open hart and open mind. In such cases there is a short possibility of having direct experience of reality, and even to share that experience with other people. It can be enlightement or on a smaller level just a result of attending really great concert and sharing experience with someone you love or like.

Uffff. Words are lying bitches by themselves, when someone talks, we again make our own subjective perception of that.
It is so hard to put some things into written form, hope I have expleined myself good enough.

 

[proglodite]

It seems that you were not reading my post for real... There is not such a thing as physical world. When scientists talks about physical world it is mostly a first category (definiton based on temporary scientific concept and social concept). When non scientist talks about physical world it is mostly a second category, person speaks out of his own experiences and concept.

Ok, I understand where you're coming from now, must've been the language barrier I would say (as you have) that 1 + 2 are very similar, as even science is just a means to explain that which is observed in 2. However I don't see how you can have a spiritual understanding of this level of 'reality', as in point 3. What is "it"?

Collective reality is something that spirit of the society has chosen as best solution for one period.

I take it by your later statement - that you disagree with an absolute physical reality - that you disagree with this notion of collective reality?

 

[Dushan S]

Ok, I understand where you're coming from now, must've been the language barrier I would say (as you have) that 1 + 2 are very similar, as even science is just a means to explain that which is observed in 2. However I don't see how you can have a spiritual understanding of this level of 'reality', as in point 3. What is "it"?

3. is not really possible to be shared. People that have experienced things for real can recognize that some other person has or has had same experience, but they do know it is individual in ABSOLUTE sense.
(even if it is true reality, so it may sound like contradition. short digression: Problem with logical explanations is that it is non practical in most cases. To explain something for real, you have to say two things that are opposite, for instance, only telling "light is opposite to darkness because it is only when there is no light", or just telling that "Light and darkness are one and the same because there would be no second without first" would be just half-truth.)
And about your question about category 3. There is a lot of different methods made for having experience of that kind, in different schools of thought and relligions. No matter what you choose you can eventually have that experience, if you work on it. Is that what you ask?

I take it by your later statement - that you disagree with an absolute physical reality - that you disagree with this notion of collective reality?

If you say that I am small, you are not telling truth. I am bigger than ant, bug, computer monitor, mug full of coffy. On the other hand if you say that I am big, it is not simply true, I am not tall person, having about 175 cm. So this is my stance to the world. I do respect its realities, I wont do things that could hurt me or other people, I will eat, pay my bills, listen to music, make love etc. On the other hand I will keep in mind that this is all something that is information feed from senses, and inner monologue of my mind, so I do not get too attached and absorbed in supposed "realities" and "problems" of the world. I try to keep in mind that it is just a psychological attachement and self hypnosis. for instance, f I love a girl I will try to love her from the heart (so that other person receives my love and feels that I am giving and open) but to be aware at the same time that it is also hormonal reaction in my body and a lot of self projection, so that I have healthy, objective understanding of situation. Had to say all of this so you can understand where I am coming from.
So I am acknowledging and respecting collective reality as well personal realities of other people, as they are affecting me often in a numerous ways, and I am affecting theirs. On the other hand, no matter what, I think it is neccesary to keep in mind that all of it is just something they are hypnotised to believe in, or something that is just their private reality they are projecting upon me.

 

[proglodite]

I have most definitely had spiritual experiences, (or just one big spiritual experience ) but I would suggest that one does not have a spiritual experience of the physical realm (or 'reality' as it has been referred to here) (and as you seem to have been suggesting) but rather a spiritual experience of the spiritual realm.

 

[Norsemaiden]

IMO it may be true that some Yogis can swallow poison and not be affected, just as faith healing works to some extent. The power of the mind can affect the body in noticable ways. But could a yogi (or a hypnotised person) walk off the edge of a cliff, believing it to be solid ground, like in Loony Toons and not fall to the bottom? The reality in their mind is then shattered by the reality of the physical world.